Chinese Broadsword vs. European Rapier

[The Pinata]

If we are going to based the techniques in the clips against kendo techniques. The winner will be kendo. The use of 45 degree sidesteps which was essential to gain a good reach for a good strike lack in the techniques in the clip. To use the 45 degree sidesteps will make the lack of katana reach a complete edge over the longsword. If one of the two guys in clip2 do that someone of the two of them got already a good hit. Katana was design to avoid sliding of the blade which eventually happened in longswords. See the clips you posted and you will find how long swords slide one another to make the follow up swings. Katana can prevent such by using the curved part to unbalance the long sword weilder and then follow up by a good diagonal slash to finish it.

The practitioners in the video are good swordfighters, although neither I, nor they would consider them experts in any sense.

You state that a 45 degree sidestep is essential, but in all fact, European martial arts of that period were also highly refined - and had developed their own unique techniques that could be used invaluably in Kendo to fantastic success.

You are comparing two very different fighting techniques with kendo and WMA - and are assuming that the longsword fighter is simply going to let himself be pulled around like that by the japanese samurai. In all reality, they were using techniques best suited for fighting between longswords. If they had to face a katana, they would have likely used techniques better suited to fighting sabers, as they are one of the closer weapons in European armories to a katana.

However, understand that there are an infinite number of possibilities, and you saying that one is the solution to all is a foolish proposition. To your unbalancing me with your curved blade, I wouldn't allow you to do that. I've practiced fighting a saber, and I know what I'm doing against curved blades.

If you really care to know, the fact that my weapon is double-edged, and that your katana is only single-edged is a big advantage for me. I have a significant increase in the number of reasonable angles from which to attack.

 

[yentao]

You stated that the katana has a shorter length. Ok let us put it that way. But ever consider the adavantage of short distance that will make the use of the offhand more easier and making the thrust stronger by pulling the opponent. Then the shorter blade is easier to weild. All you said about rapier capabilities of hiting many parts fast can be done by the katana to. And even if you put that rapier on the way the curve part of blade can be use to maneuver that the thrust over the rapier. So making a good thrust was not an issue you forget about it.

And I said pull slash not pulling. You try using other angles of attack then it will more easier to parry you. You underestimate that value of the blunt are beside the single edge sword. It was built to parry and it can withstand strong blows. Remember that the samurai warriors know how to deal with double edge swords because they such swords before and they change their sword style to attain combat excellence.

Assuming that the longswordsman don't know how to use saber becuase he is into longswords. The saber dude knows more because he knows what a saber can do becuase the saber dude use the long sword before and did not work in his advantage.

Anyway I'm not referring on you, you are from this modern age we are talking about the past where samurai and knights never met before.

We are not talking about ourselves so who cares if you have a two hand sword and i don't really care to know. I don't like to tell stories before it actually really happened.

Remember mactan, 600 augmented spaniards against knife weilding natives all the 600 that went into battle only a dozen of people manage to leave the battle uninjured.

 

[yentao]

Assuming there is an indefinite possiblities in the fight. Then the chance of unbalancing you before you know is greater than the chance of failing. I might get infection from the rapier strikes and I might die because of it atleast I was able to die because of the infection not the by strike but you a single stroke can kill you in seconds. You said it your self that physically the katana is more damaging. Thanks for agreeing finally.

 

[yentao]

The curve of the katana was not an issue in executing a thrust. Some prefer thrusting horizontally. If you are going to thrust it vertically it would be easier to stop your opponent easily because the blade was curved upward, if it was on the stomach the tip of the blade will hit through the spine or hit other organs as well and when it will make the person leap up a little and make him hard to move because the blade will go deeper. So what you are saying about katana is bull *****.

In fact, I already explained to you that the katana cannot perform an "on-compass" thrust. You just agreed with me here. Methods for thrusting with a katana are slower, less powerful, have significantly less reach, and expose the wielder significantly more than an "on-compass" thrust for various reasons.

I noted before that katana can be wielded with one hand the use of (chinese straight swords as their weaponry validates this) and the use of two handed thrust may lack range but it has complete control of the blade making wielding faster and making the handler hard to get parried out of balance.

In fact, one-hand wielding of a Katana became noticed around the time of Musashi, who was not a fighter within the traditional bounds of Japanese culture. He had witnessed the fighting style of the Europeans and had adopted from them. Even in that case, he still preferred the two-handed grip, although he was influential in the development of the one-handed katana style. This is far after the 13th-15th century time period that you requested.

Katana was made curve because the use of long straight swords was not enough to use against their enemies. It will not be change if it was perfect.

In fact, the katana was developed with a curve for a variety of reasons, one of them being that the curve more easily induces a draw-cut, although a skilled user will perform as adept a draw-cut with a straight sword as they will with a curved sword. The katana did not change largely due to the fact that the Japanese valued tradition incredibly. Breaking with tradition was very much against their values, and although the katana could have seen refinement, they did not do such.

Take the saber, why the europeans created this weapons as a replacement for the longsword

You show your ignorance again. The saber was a European weapon that was primarily developed for mounted combat, the reason being that the curved blade was extremely effective in a mounted situation where it would be used to draw cut rapidly across an opponent, and did not need to be thrust. In no sense was a saber a superior sword - it just filled a niche.

The turkis use curved blade or the sabers to conquer parts of eastern europe which uses longswords at the time. The Islamic warriors used curved blades like falchion to conquer some parts of Spain with use of these blades. Gunpowder are the only thing that saved them in the war. It is clear how easy to use curved blades. Take the Damascus blades. The reason I brought up these is to state that curve blades is a great weapon for fighting especially and thrusting was never difficult. Actually the curved side of the blade can be used for hooking blocks and sweeping.

Once again, you demonstrate ignorance by assuming all of this. In fact, although Muslim occupation did occur in the areas of Palestine, as well as large parts of Spain - these occupations were ended during the Crusades and for quite some time thereafter. Eventually, the Europeans abandoned the Middle East because it no longer enticed them. However, the retained the whole of Spain for the entire time thereafter. And gunpowder was not an influential part in this, in fact noting that the Turkish were more adept in the use of firearms than the Europeans were for quite some time.

If you got thrust by rapier you can still move if a katana you are limping.

If you got thrust by a rapier, you are in significant pain. Furthermore, there is a huge amount of historical record to suggest that a rapier blow was eventually fatal. The reason for this was infection, as the rapier created a particularly nasty wound, and most successful rapier duelists would eventually die to an infection caused by a wound. In many cases, both fighters would end up killing each other through infection, although the fight itself had ended in a draw for one reason or another.

Once again, a thrust with a katana is far more difficult, and in no sense more powerful. The actual thrusting action itself, due to technique, caused a weaker blow. For your note, both the rapier and katana were good at making their opponent's limp, as thrust blows are very painful.

Rapier and katana are good weapons but if both are to fight, I'll put my money to the katana because firstly, it was an older blade and was tested in battlefield for centuries. Second, It has the value od experience and the more older the weapon is the more its techniques were develope. Lastly, it was still being use by mafia or the yakuza around the world. Here in the Philippines when you go south you'll find katana being use by some christian vigilants.

The katana is a shorter blade and is slower than a rapier. They are both very good weapons for their individual purposes, but in all honesty, it is like trying to compare apples and oranges. I would place my money with the rapier, because it has the advantages of reach, speed, and a great thrusting action. On the other hand, a solid blow with a katana against an unarmored fighter is almost certainly the loss of a limb or death.

In all truth, I'd take the rapier. The amount of wounds you take to your hands as well as non-vitals, will probably result in your death to infection - and there is huge historic record to back this up. Furthermore, I could hit you anywhere from your stomach to your face, and deal a killing blow in that area in hitting any of a number of vitals, such as the stomach, the lungs, the heart, the throat, the eyes, or even an artery leading away from the heart.

On the katana's part, I could perhaps make a swift killing blow, but it isn't necessarily that likely. Although the katana can do more physical damage, it doesn't have the advantages of reach or speed that were inherent to the rapier.

Like i said Katana was not questionable as a one hand weapon. Musashi didn't originated it the use of it. Obviously you don't know how to use katana. Two katana fighting was already valid before only musashi popularized it. You better forget about making him as your reference about one hand katana. There are short types of katana use for one hand, the wakizashi and Tanto. Perfect thrusting weapons. Use mostly by pirates. Stating that katana is not design for thrusting is another idiotic statement.

About you early statement about katana tradition is another crap to because
some samurai warrior use longer types of katana called Nodachi.

 

[yentao]

About maille when you said a good made is hard to make. The that was no longer made standard because it wasn't accesible enough. Therefore most of the maille use before are easier to break.

Arnis has a wide range of uses, it was unlike the great sword and those single weapon application you stated. You try living here and you will agree. Like I said christian vigilants and other rebels was able to use katana or tanto for weaponry and they are applying arnis techniques with it. You don't know much about arnis so don't argue about it, upon your statements about katana and arnis, i can already see the ignorance and carelessness of someone trying to know everything but actually ignorant about it.

Lastly, about turkish, I doubt they use more firearms because they where famous for their archers. The spanish indeed use short handgunners with pavise and cannons to thwart raging muslims. Your statement was insignificant and hard to believe. The crusade ended because they were getting outnumbered and one by one getting killed. It was also beginning to be so expensive considering the raids on their supplies. Like all other wars, the conqueror only good at first but loses at the end.

 

[The Pinata]

You stated that the katana has a shorter length.

Yes. A katana's blade is shorter than a comparably weighter longsword's by anywhere from 8"-12".

Ok let us put it that way. But ever consider the adavantage of short distance that will make the use of the offhand more easier and making the thrust stronger by pulling the opponent. Then the shorter blade is easier to weild. All you said about rapier capabilities of hiting many parts fast can be done by the katana to. And even if you put that rapier on the way the curve part of blade can be use to maneuver that the thrust over the rapier. So making a good thrust was not an issue you forget about it.

In fact, there is nothing about the katana that would make one-handed use easier. It is a heavy blade, and was not well designed for a one-handed wield. Most Samurai including Musashi would still make more use of the two-handed wield because in most situations it was more effective. Secondly, there is no advantage to a curved or a short blade in thrusting. The entire mechanism of that sort of thrust, even when best presented, has significantly more exposure, is not as quick, and doesn't have the same reach. Secondly, if you really expect to use a short distance in combat, don't ever believe that your opponent would let you. If my rapier has a blade length of 40"-45", I'm going to keep you at that length, and coming any closer is putting yourself in peril of being thrusted.

Once again, I am stating that it would be much more difficult to counter the rapier's thrust because it is an extremely deft manuever. There is very little time to respond with a counter because it arrives so quick due to the technique of a one-handed straight blade.

And I said pull slash not pulling. You try using other angles of attack then it will more easier to parry you. You underestimate that value of the blunt are beside the single edge sword. It was built to parry and it can withstand strong blows. Remember that the samurai warriors know how to deal with double edge swords because they such swords before and they change their sword style to attain combat excellence.

In fact, the advantage of a double-edged blade are several. Sword edges were very well made to stand up to strong parries. And the fact that I can attack you from more angles than you can attack me gives me an advantage in the fact that you have to parry well at more angles. All reasonable swords were built to parry, and there are no real swords that can't withstand a strong blow. And for your concern, the Europeans also knew very well how to bout with curved blades, as there was a good arsenal of sabers and such in European armories.

Assuming that the longswordsman don't know how to use saber becuase he is into longswords. The saber dude knows more because he knows what a saber can do becuase the saber dude use the long sword before and did not work in his advantage.

This was a rather false statement. I stated that as much as the Samurai has seen a straight blade, the Knight has seen a curved blade. Neither is alien to all sorts of blades, and there was in fact much more variety in Europe as many swords were developed for specific purposes.

Anyway I'm not referring on you, you are from this modern age we are talking about the past where samurai and knights never met before.

I'm not talking about the modern age either. You called me idiotic - and I resent that. Going on, my entire arguement - per your request - is 13th-15th century - except where you attack the rapier which is out of that period.

We are not talking about ourselves so who cares if you have a two hand sword and i don't really care to know. I don't like to tell stories before it actually really happened.

It's happened. Trying the wrong technique with the wrong sword is dangerous, and I suggest that you stop before you hurt yourself. The weapons are very different, and they have developed their own techniques that best suit their advantages.

Like i said Katana was not questionable as a one hand weapon. Musashi didn't originated it the use of it. Obviously you don't know how to use katana. Two katana fighting was already valid before only musashi popularized it. You better forget about making him as your reference about one hand katana. There are short types of katana use for one hand, the wakizashi and Tanto. Perfect thrusting weapons. Use mostly by pirates. Stating that katana is not design for thrusting is another idiotic statement.

Katana was very questionable as a one-handed weapon. Until Musashi developed technique for it based on what he had seen Europeans doing, there is not any historical record to suggest that the Samurai were fighting with one-handed katanas. Even Musashi did not suggest one-handed wielding in most situations - it was a specialized use. Two katana fighting was a rare occurence, and the first warrior to make real use of it was Musashi - who developed it based on European technique.
You also state that there are Wakizashi and Tanto. These are significantly different weapons from the Katana - they were used for different purposes, wielded differently, and different technique was typically employed. Because they are different types of blades.

About you early statement about katana tradition is another crap to because
some samurai warrior use longer types of katana called Nodachi.

Once again, the use of Nodachi was not exceptionally common, and the blade was heavy to the point that the weight was a detriment. Even so, significantly different blades cannot be considered the same because the technique has to be adjusted for a very different blade.

About maille when you said a good made is hard to make. The that was no longer made standard because it wasn't accesible enough. Therefore most of the maille use before are easier to break.
Maille was very tedious to make in it's time, but because it was a matter of life and death there was a significant of amount of maille and it was a rather standard armor. Modern mail is built using a different technique that is recently developed, and the middle ages didn't know these techniques, nor would they have bothered with them because they don't work very well... they just make a cosmetic mail.

Arnis has a wide range of uses, it was unlike the great sword and those single weapon application you stated. You try living here and you will agree. Like I said christian vigilants and other rebels was able to use katana or tanto for weaponry and they are applying arnis techniques with it. You don't know much about arnis so don't argue about it, upon your statements about katana and arnis, i can already see the ignorance and carelessness of someone trying to know everything but actually ignorant about it.
Looking at Christian vigiliants attacking the people with katanas and tantos, that is rather stupid. They're outdated weapons, and as I see you with your katana, all I have to do is draw my pistol and kill you. It's not even a fair fight. It's over so quickly because all you have to do is shoot them. And I honestly doubt that they are applying arnis with a katana. It is a very different technique that is designed to be applied to a very different blade - and applying it to a blade so heavy as a katana would be dangerous to the wielder.

Lastly, about turkish, I doubt they use more firearms because they where famous for their archers. The spanish indeed use short handgunners with pavise and cannons to thwart raging muslims. Your statement was insignificant and hard to believe. The crusade ended because they were getting outnumbered and one by one getting killed. It was also beginning to be so expensive considering the raids on their supplies. Like all other wars, the conqueror only good at first but loses at the end.

The Turkish were renowned for their cannon. Janissaries were an all to common Turkish force, and their artillery was second to none. Far superior to their contemporaries for quite some time. The Spanish did utilize firearms because they were damned effective, but they did not use them in the scope that the Turks did. The Turks used firearms incredibly effectively, and it took the Europeans a significant amount of time and effort to catch up.

The Crusades ended because the Europeans no longer needed them. One of the original reasons was the pressure on Byzantine, and that pressure had been relieved. The Europeans were also starting to wear with the warfare, and supply lines were stretched. The Crusades were costly affairs. Eventually, they just stopped them, and in fact the Third Crusade was the last real Crusade into the Middle East. The rest were on the level of armed jokes, excluding the Crusades into Spain and Eastern Europe, which were still wholeheartedly employed.

 

[WLMantisKid]

Please, Pinata, Katana blades were up to 3' in length, LONGER than a longswords.

And this is a discussion about the chinese broadsword vs a rapier... not a katana vs a rapier.

chinese broadswords and katanas are very dissimilar weapons.

PS the Wakazashi is just a short katana. curved blade and everything. and Katanas were not heavy.

 

[yentao]

Please, Pinata, Katana blades were up to 3' in length, LONGER than a longswords.

And this is a discussion about the chinese broadsword vs a rapier... not a katana vs a rapier.

chinese broadswords and katanas are very dissimilar weapons.

PS the Wakazashi is just a short katana. curved blade and everything. and Katanas were not heavy.

See Pinata.
Katana is not heavy blade I know you don't know much about katana and even handle one if you did you don't know how to use two hand weapons. cause if you did, handling a katana will be easy and you will find how swift it can be. I know rapier and how fast and long it is. But consider it like this, it was like a kick, good at long distance but hard to use in short close fight. Katana is easier to control in short distance because of the curve of the blade you will be able to push the blade in the blunt side to block or push the blade through in a short distance. In short you can handled the blade in the blunt area and able to manuever it. That is the good thing about single edge blade. Observe the Chinese Long Broadsword's techniques some pushes the blunt side for strong blocking. This you can't do to double edges.

I guess you are only to super light weapons the reason you found katana so heavy. If I had the chance to give you a demo I'll show you how to wield a katana using three fingers. The thing you said about applying arnis to broadsword is just another idiotic thing to say. I already did it and find no reason why it is dangerous. As long it is a short sword or a dagger you can use it. Beside arnis is not only applicable for short daggers. Jose Rizal and Antonio Luna, two Filipino heroes, knows fencing and uses his arnis footworks to a rapier. It was said that Rizal won a tournament in Munich, Germany. Antonio won a tournament in Barcelona. Same Arnis footworks use by Flash Elorde and Muhammad Ali who said to have both learned arnis. So Mr. Pinata what can you say. I have, you are an idiot.

About the turks. They were really known for their cavalry and long range attacks. Even so when they are charging, they use sabers. They conquered Romania and fought Hungary and the fear of them as good swordsmen are reputable.

The curved blade has a more slashing power. Rapier is easier to break than a katana. Lets refer to a stick, if it is long its hard to break and if it is shorter it is harder to break. Katana able to fix this problem by curving the blade and dividing the weight in the middle part of the edge where the most curved part lies and the hilt. Rapier are althrough has plenty of fullers making it flexible but its length could be bias.

Pinata, If you want I can teach you how to use a katana. I doubt you know even how to handle it.

 

[Blindside]

:deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse

 

[The Pinata]

Please, Pinata, Katana blades were up to 3' in length, LONGER than a longswords.

And this is a discussion about the chinese broadsword vs a rapier... not a katana vs a rapier.

chinese broadswords and katanas are very dissimilar weapons.

PS the Wakazashi is just a short katana. curved blade and everything. and Katanas were not heavy.

WLMantis - That is not accurate. The longer katanas measured in at less than 30", and those were around the weight of 3lbs. You don't want to go much past that weight because the sword is getting to heavy.

In comparison, the average longsword had a blade of anywhere from 36"-42". That is nearly half a foot to an entire foot of blade length increased over the katana. You are not knowledgeable of European longswords, or katanas - and I wish you would research those facts a little more.

Actually, earlier in the discussion, Yentao and I agreed that we would discuss a longsword against a katana.

Katanas were not too heavy - but they were on the heavy end for swords. You don't want a blade much over 3lbs, because it becomes difficult to use. In fact, the average longsword was similiarly weighted to a much shorter katana.

See Pinata.
Katana is not heavy blade I know you don't know much about katana and even handle one if you did you don't know how to use two hand weapons. cause if you did, handling a katana will be easy and you will find how swift it can be. I know rapier and how fast and long it is. But consider it like this, it was like a kick, good at long distance but hard to use in short close fight. Katana is easier to control in short distance because of the curve of the blade you will be able to push the blade in the blunt side to block or push the blade through in a short distance. In short you can handled the blade in the blunt area and able to manuever it. That is the good thing about single edge blade. Observe the Chinese Long Broadsword's techniques some pushes the blunt side for strong blocking. This you can't do to double edges.

I guess you are only to super light weapons the reason you found katana so heavy. If I had the chance to give you a demo I'll show you how to wield a katana using three fingers. The thing you said about applying arnis to broadsword is just another idiotic thing to say. I already did it and find no reason why it is dangerous. As long it is a short sword or a dagger you can use it. Beside arnis is not only applicable for short daggers. Jose Rizal and Antonio Luna, two Filipino heroes, knows fencing and uses his arnis footworks to a rapier. It was said that Rizal won a tournament in Munich, Germany. Antonio won a tournament in Barcelona. Same Arnis footworks use by Flash Elorde and Muhammad Ali who said to have both learned arnis. So Mr. Pinata what can you say. I have, you are an idiot.

About the turks. They were really known for their cavalry and long range attacks. Even so when they are charging, they use sabers. They conquered Romania and fought Hungary and the fear of them as good swordsmen are reputable.

One idiot gives me a bunch of crap about how a three foot blade - incredibly long for a katana, was longer than a longsword's blade - when in fact that was on the short end for longswords. I know a substantial amount about katanas, and although good swords, they do not live up to their hype.

You claim that you could hold a katana by the blunt edge. While this is true, and I could not repeat this feat with a rapier, I very much can do this with a longsword. Apparently you have never heard of "half-swording". It was a technique popular in continental Europe with longswords. The Europeans very much had developed techniques for handling the blade, and I ask you to look into half-swording. It was a common technique with longswords.

Going on, I did not say that a katana was too heavy, but I stated that it was on the heavy end for swords. You can wield a katana at 3lbs, and I can wield a longsword that is a foot longer at 3lbs. I am not very knowledgeable of arnis, but you did not state that he actually used entire arnis techniques - just the footwork, which is reasonable.

The Turks conquered Romania for a time, but were sent packing when larger powers from Europe rode through the area. And the Turks had very little luck against the militarily capable Hungary. However, if you were to actually research into the Turks, they were well known for their cannon and firearms - and it was one of the main reasons they were so successful. They may have been good swordsmen - but I don't see them having conquered a reputable force such as Hungary, and Romania bordered on a joke.

The curved blade has a more slashing power. Rapier is easier to break than a katana. Lets refer to a stick, if it is long its hard to break and if it is shorter it is harder to break. Katana able to fix this problem by curving the blade and dividing the weight in the middle part of the edge where the most curved part lies and the hilt. Rapier are althrough has plenty of fullers making it flexible but its length could be bias.

A curved blade does not have more slashing power. It more easily induces a draw cut when one slashes, however an adept user can just as easily cause a draw cut with a straight sword. And for that note, there isn't significant effect through a draw cut against plate armor, especially in the case of a katana, because it's cutting point widens out way to steeply.

And a rapier isn't easier to break than a katana for a reason. This reason is that it is flexible. Katanas were remarkeably unflexible, but I will explain why flexibility protects a sword. The initial shock from your hit is the time when my sword is in most danger. The rapier rather than standing to this shock, simply absorbs it by flexing backwards. As soon as the pressure is relieved it bends back. The rapier was not a very rigid sword, and it was very well known for its flexibility, as this kept it in good shape. European swords in general were well known for flexibility due to their design for that matter.

And yes, I am generally knowledgeable of how one fights with a katana. It is a very different weapon than a European longsword, and one cannot apply Kendo techniques very effectively to longsword as they are two different weapons.

 

[WLMantisKid]

Stop the flaming, bub.

The book of five rings details wielding a katana only gripping with 3 and a half fingers.

Also, every famous swordmaker was different. Many makers had Katanas that started at 3'.


PS if you're going to discuss longsword vs katana, a rapier isn't a longsword. Keep your crap straight.
I dont even know what hype I'm mentioning, other than there were some very long Katanas.

 

[The Pinata]

Stop the flaming, bub.

The book of five rings details wielding a katana only gripping with 3 and a half fingers.

Also, every famous swordmaker was different. Many makers had Katanas that started at 3'.


PS if you're going to discuss longsword vs katana, a rapier isn't a longsword. Keep your crap straight.
I dont even know what hype I'm mentioning, other than there were some very long Katanas.

I would like you to cite me some historic katanas that had a blade of 36". That would be an extremely heavy katana, considering that all the accurate katanas I've found have weighed in at about 3lbs for a 30" katana. Now, that does not account for the tsuka, which would add a significant amount to the length of the sword, but I'm not accounting for the handle on a longsword either which is fairly long. I was solely comparing the fact that an average katana had a length of 30", whilst an average longsword was near 40".

Perhaps you were giving me lengths with the Tsuka included. Apologies, but we have been comparing just the blade lengths - handles not included.

For the matter, I have been keeping my crap straight, but Yentao has this habit of continuing attacking the rapier, even though he asked me to keep the debate to the longsword and I agreed to that. And I would appreciate it if he stopped attacking the rapier right now, because he is not following up what he agreed to do. And yes, I know very well the characteristics of rapiers and longswords, and I am a decent swordfighter with both.

 

[yentao]

I would like you to cite me some historic katanas that had a blade of 36". That would be an extremely heavy katana, considering that all the accurate katanas I've found have weighed in at about 3lbs for a 30" katana. Now, that does not account for the tsuka, which would add a significant amount to the length of the sword, but I'm not accounting for the handle on a longsword either which is fairly long. I was solely comparing the fact that an average katana had a length of 30", whilst an average longsword was near 40".

Perhaps you were giving me lengths with the Tsuka included. Apologies, but we have been comparing just the blade lengths - handles not included.

For the matter, I have been keeping my crap straight, but Yentao has this habit of continuing attacking the rapier, even though he asked me to keep the debate to the longsword and I agreed to that. And I would appreciate it if he stopped attacking the rapier right now, because he is not following up what he agreed to do. And yes, I know very well the characteristics of rapiers and longswords, and I am a decent swordfighter with both.

I did not attack the capabilities of the rapier. Flexibility has nothing to do with damage. You are just paranoid. Don't blame me for your own crap, you are the one that started to attack katana and I was just replying on your idiotic statements. The use of katana was easy even you cited it as heavy, it can be used easily, it was because the way it was handled. In using it as a two handed weapon. The thumb, index finger, and the middle finger should be the only ones gripping the handle firmly. The right hand controls the thrust movements and the angles while the left hand controls the choping movements. In these way the katana can be use to slash and chop fast.

Actually we are only talking about the rapier and katana. You are the one that brought up the longsword, european knight, augmentations and armor. We are only talking about the rapier and katana. You're an ******* no doubt about it. You are stupid, crazy, and idiotic piece of **** who acts like he knows how to use a katana. I'll stick that rapier in your ***. Now can we talk only about the rapier and the katana. I still will bet that I can break a rapier on two faster than a katana. The longer and lighter the easier it can break even you put several of fuller on it, it has nothing to do with its damage. This is true no crap about like what pinata does. Katana varies in design and being standard, katana is a more complete weapon than the longsword and the rapier. Singles weapon is even safer to use. Halfswording or halfcrap, it would still be safer to hold a katana blade and even hold it properly that you won't mind the back edge piercing your hand no matter how the strike against the block is. Try that to long sword or rapier huh? To a rapier the blade will bend towards you or even hit your face when to use it to block a katana. For get about the armors let us talk about the sword only. This is not attacking don't get so paranoid. Don't cry to me too. You are making it bad for you.

 

[yentao]

A curved blade does not have more slashing power. It more easily induces a draw cut when one slashes, however an adept user can just as easily cause a draw cut with a straight sword. And for that note, there isn't significant effect through a draw cut against plate armor, especially in the case of a katana, because it's cutting point widens out way to steeply.


And yes, I am generally knowledgeable of how one fights with a katana. It is a very different weapon than a European longsword, and one cannot apply Kendo techniques very effectively to longsword as they are two different weapons.

No you don't know anything about how katana was used. You are just trying to be Mister "I know everything" again.

Whether it was a draw cut or not, when a katana is use to slash the sliding motion is applied to damage more stronger. It was not just simple slash. Damn, you don't know how to use a katana. Don't argue anymore when you don't know what you are saying.

 

[The Pinata]

I did not attack the capabilities of the rapier. Flexibility has nothing to do with damage. You are just paranoid. Don't blame me for your own crap, you are the one that started to attack katana and I was just replying on your idiotic statements. The use of katana was easy even you cited it as heavy, it can be used easily, it was because the way it was handled. In using it as a two handed weapon. The thumb, index finger, and the middle finger should be the only ones gripping the handle firmly. The right hand controls the thrust movements and the angles while the left hand controls the choping movements. In these way the katana can be use to slash and chop fast.

Flexibility very much will protect a sword from damage. How can you not understand this? It won't damage another sword, but the fact that it bends rather than breaks makes it a stronger sword. For example, a good bridge is flexible - if it's not, it can't hold as much weight. Have you ever been in an airplane and looked out the window to see the wings bending? That's because they're flexible too - if they weren't, they wouldn't be able to hold up to flight. Flexibility is extremely important to resisting damage, and the rapier was a remarkeably flexible sword. Not to state that it wouldn't be possible to break a rapier if I was an idiot in my defense. If I stood there performing passive, rigid, blocks with the forward part of my blade, yes - I'd probably break the blade. However, as I would know how to use my blade, I would be using the mid to back for parries, where it was sturdier, and I would be using a block that would more deflect your blade than stop it.

As for the weight of the katana, at 3lbs, yes it was an above average weighted sword. With two hands, this is easily workable, and I never claimed that its weight was a detriment, but if you go much over that weight, you will start noticing your weight, and that is not a good thing.

Actually we are only talking about the rapier and katana. You are the one that brought up the longsword, european knight, augmentations and armor. We are only talking about the rapier and katana. You're an ******* no doubt about it. You are stupid, crazy, and idiotic piece of **** who acts like he knows how to use a katana. I'll stick that rapier in your ***. Now can we talk only about the rapier and the katana. I still will bet that I can break a rapier on two faster than a katana. The longer and lighter the easier it can break even you put several of fuller on it, it has nothing to do with its damage. This is true no crap about like what pinata does. Katana varies in design and being standard, katana is a more complete weapon than the longsword and the rapier. Singles weapon is even safer to use. Halfswording or halfcrap, it would still be safer to hold a katana blade and even hold it properly that you won't mind the back edge piercing your hand no matter how the strike against the block is. Try that to long sword or rapier huh? To a rapier the blade will bend towards you or even hit your face when to use it to block a katana. For get about the armors let us talk about the sword only. This is not attacking don't get so paranoid. Don't cry to me too. You are making it bad for you.

Is that the best you can do? Calling a piece of ****, and swear at me? You're not really winning this. Rather than being smart about it and intelligently debating me on the merits, you just say ****ING PIECE OF DAMN **** and call me names. Who's doing the flaming? Certainly isn't me.

You want to just talk about the rapier vs katana? Alright. We'll focus on that then for the remainder of this arguement. And, no - you will not break a rapier with a katana, because of the flexibility which I have already explained. The thin design on it doesn't encourage its sturdiness - I'll agree with that, but because it is so damned flexible, it is almost impossible to break them. The only track record for breaks was the loss of a tip within the victim during the removal.

"Katana is a more complete weapon than a longsword or rapier"? What do you base this claim on? There is no proof to it. And I'm guessing you'll claim, "Because they didn't have to change it." I'll refute that already by stating the reason they never had to change it was because they didn't evolve. The reason the rapier was developed was because firearms had rendered armor obsolete, and it was also largely as a civilian weapon.

"Halfswording or halfcrap, it would still be safer to hold a katana blade and even hold it properly that you won't mind the back edge piercing your hand no matter how the strike against the block is." You don't even have a clue what halfswording is. It was an extremely common technique, and was used very effectively. Just like your earlier statements. I am not an expert in katana, but I do understand the basics. Perhaps you understand the simplest idea of longsword, but you have no clue how to use them effectively. Do not dismiss a technique simply because it isn't a Japanese technique, or you don't know what it is. Because you don't have a clue.

The halfsword technique involves a swordsman grabbing the blade to use it effectively in very close combat. If the blade is sharp, it's best to have a protective glove, or gauntlet, especially in the heat of battle. Commonsense dictates it. Is it possible to do so without a glove, I would guess so, but a gauntlet makes it effective. If the blade isn't sharpe, then it's a different story. I can grab the blade of my unsharpened Del Tin 2143 and use the halfsword technique, but if I tried the same with my sharpened 2121, I'd cut my hand. It's safe to say that a sharpe sword needs a protected hand to hold it when doing the halfsword technique.

Whether it was a draw cut or not, when a katana is use to slash the sliding motion is applied to damage more stronger. It was not just simple slash. Damn, you don't know how to use a katana. Don't argue anymore when you don't know what you are saying.

This is true, and the sliding motion was applied to create more damage against soft targets. Against armor, this sliding motion is ineffectual, although I guess we are removing armor from the picture because you want to debate a rapier vs katana. However, the wielder of a longsword would also apply that exact same slide to create the same damage when hitting soft targets. Both used that sliding cut, and neither was "just simple slash". I am a basic user with the katana - not great. But you have at least as little knowledge about the longsword as I have about the katana. Read these articles, and it might increase your knowledge somewhat.
http://www.thearma.org/essays/nobest.htm
Katana vs Rapier -- Fantasy Worth Considering
The Myth of Edge-On-Edge Parrying in Medieval Swordplay
What Makes an Effective Sword Cut?
There Is No Best Sword
Questions and Answers About the Rapier
A Brief Introduction to Armored Longsword Combat

 

[yentao]

I did not attack the capabilities of the rapier. Flexibility has nothing to do with damage. You are just paranoid. Don't blame me for your own crap, you are the one that started to attack katana and I was just replying on your idiotic statements. The use of katana was easy even you cited it as heavy, it can be used easily, it was because the way it was handled. In using it as a two handed weapon. The thumb, index finger, and the middle finger should be the only ones gripping the handle firmly. The right hand controls the thrust movements and the angles while the left hand controls the choping movements. In these way the katana can be use to slash and chop fast.

Flexibility very much will protect a sword from damage. How can you not understand this? It won't damage another sword, but the fact that it bends rather than breaks makes it a stronger sword. For example, a good bridge is flexible - if it's not, it can't hold as much weight. Have you ever been in an airplane and looked out the window to see the wings bending? That's because they're flexible too - if they weren't, they wouldn't be able to hold up to flight. Flexibility is extremely important to resisting damage, and the rapier was a remarkeably flexible sword. Not to state that it wouldn't be possible to break a rapier if I was an idiot in my defense. If I stood there performing passive, rigid, blocks with the forward part of my blade, yes - I'd probably break the blade. However, as I would know how to use my blade, I would be using the mid to back for parries, where it was sturdier, and I would be using a block that would more deflect your blade than stop it.

As for the weight of the katana, at 3lbs, yes it was an above average weighted sword. With two hands, this is easily workable, and I never claimed that its weight was a detriment, but if you go much over that weight, you will start noticing your weight, and that is not a good thing.

Actually we are only talking about the rapier and katana. You are the one that brought up the longsword, european knight, augmentations and armor. We are only talking about the rapier and katana. You're an ******* no doubt about it. You are stupid, crazy, and idiotic piece of **** who acts like he knows how to use a katana. I'll stick that rapier in your ***. Now can we talk only about the rapier and the katana. I still will bet that I can break a rapier on two faster than a katana. The longer and lighter the easier it can break even you put several of fuller on it, it has nothing to do with its damage. This is true no crap about like what pinata does. Katana varies in design and being standard, katana is a more complete weapon than the longsword and the rapier. Singles weapon is even safer to use. Halfswording or halfcrap, it would still be safer to hold a katana blade and even hold it properly that you won't mind the back edge piercing your hand no matter how the strike against the block is. Try that to long sword or rapier huh? To a rapier the blade will bend towards you or even hit your face when to use it to block a katana. For get about the armors let us talk about the sword only. This is not attacking don't get so paranoid. Don't cry to me too. You are making it bad for you.

Is that the best you can do? Calling a piece of ****, and swear at me? You're not really winning this. Rather than being smart about it and intelligently debating me on the merits, you just say ****ING PIECE OF DAMN **** and call me names. Who's doing the flaming? Certainly isn't me.

You want to just talk about the rapier vs katana? Alright. We'll focus on that then for the remainder of this arguement. And, no - you will not break a rapier with a katana, because of the flexibility which I have already explained. The thin design on it doesn't encourage its sturdiness - I'll agree with that, but because it is so damned flexible, it is almost impossible to break them. The only track record for breaks was the loss of a tip within the victim during the removal.

"Katana is a more complete weapon than a longsword or rapier"? What do you base this claim on? There is no proof to it. And I'm guessing you'll claim, "Because they didn't have to change it." I'll refute that already by stating the reason they never had to change it was because they didn't evolve. The reason the rapier was developed was because firearms had rendered armor obsolete, and it was also largely as a civilian weapon.

"Halfswording or halfcrap, it would still be safer to hold a katana blade and even hold it properly that you won't mind the back edge piercing your hand no matter how the strike against the block is." You don't even have a clue what halfswording is. It was an extremely common technique, and was used very effectively. Just like your earlier statements. I am not an expert in katana, but I do understand the basics. Perhaps you understand the simplest idea of longsword, but you have no clue how to use them effectively. Do not dismiss a technique simply because it isn't a Japanese technique, or you don't know what it is. Because you don't have a clue.

The halfsword technique involves a swordsman grabbing the blade to use it effectively in very close combat. If the blade is sharp, it's best to have a protective glove, or gauntlet, especially in the heat of battle. Commonsense dictates it. Is it possible to do so without a glove, I would guess so, but a gauntlet makes it effective. If the blade isn't sharpe, then it's a different story. I can grab the blade of my unsharpened Del Tin 2143 and use the halfsword technique, but if I tried the same with my sharpened 2121, I'd cut my hand. It's safe to say that a sharpe sword needs a protected hand to hold it when doing the halfsword technique.

Whether it was a draw cut or not, when a katana is use to slash the sliding motion is applied to damage more stronger. It was not just simple slash. Damn, you don't know how to use a katana. Don't argue anymore when you don't know what you are saying.

This is true, and the sliding motion was applied to create more damage against soft targets. Against armor, this sliding motion is ineffectual, although I guess we are removing armor from the picture because you want to debate a rapier vs katana. However, the wielder of a longsword would also apply that exact same slide to create the same damage when hitting soft targets. Both used that sliding cut, and neither was "just simple slash". I am a basic user with the katana - not great. But you have at least as little knowledge about the longsword as I have about the katana. Read these articles, and it might increase your knowledge somewhat.
http://www.thearma.org/essays/nobest.htm
Katana vs Rapier -- Fantasy Worth Considering
The Myth of Edge-On-Edge Parrying in Medieval Swordplay
What Makes an Effective Sword Cut?
There Is No Best Sword
Questions and Answers About the Rapier
A Brief Introduction to Armored Longsword Combat

I'd rather read than talk to you. Give me time to read this up. Is this where you get your sources? For me, I'll side up with katana is because katana can be used more than the rapier in this era. Ok you said they are equal, but I'd rather learn how to use a katana than a rapier like most people will do.
Thanks for the links by the way. Ok no more flaming although you did too, that is why all this started. You know remember when you said this: (there is a saying goes, blahblah you are making it bad) :2xBird2:

 

[The Pinata]

I'd rather read than talk to you. Give me time to read this up. Is this where you get your sources? For me, I'll side up with katana is because katana can be used more than the rapier in this era. Ok you said they are equal, but I'd rather learn how to use a katana than a rapier like most people will do.
Thanks for the links by the way. Ok no more flaming although you did too, that is why all this started. You know remember when you said this: (there is a saying goes, blahblah you are making it bad) :2xBird2:

Then go read and learn something. And you started flaming me almost off the bat. You are incredibly ignorant of European Martial Arts, and no sword has real practical use in this era. You can come at me with your katana, and I'll just pull out my pistol, and shoot eight bullets through your head. Unless you believe Hollywood, and think you can dodge my bullets, or your sword can stop them. In this era, swords no longer hold a real military application.

The only reason most people like to learn katana is because Hollywood glorified them. The reason for this was because there is a mystique to all things from Asia. This is changing and the Western Martial Arts are being rediscovered rapidly - a lot of the stuff I speak of is relatively recent findings of very old technique.

 

[yentao]

People still use katana to kill people. Try living here even if there is the gunpowder some people tries the more resourceful and cheaper way. Of course no one can dodge bullets I never say i can, that is another senseless thing to say and accuse. And everything else you said came from you paranoid head, You might know about European swordmanship but I doubt you even use them.

Ok you said that european techniques are being rediscovered. Old techniques from recent findings hmmm..... You are saying like that it became really old because people before find it useless and forget about it. You said yourself. You are not careful.

You know what you really are an idiotic piece of crap. No doubt about it. Another thing, you just felt insulted because you know that you can't use a rapier against a katana so you choose a gun. Even so what are you going to use pellets and water? And is it has to take you three bullets to take someone down? Idiot. This isn't the west we got no time for fake **** and ineffective piece of crap, we leave it that to commercialization. Lastly, if you can put up shut up. :2xBird2:

 

[The Pinata]

People still use katana to kill people. Try living here even if there is the gunpowder some people tries the more resourceful and cheaper way. Of course no one can dodge bullets I never say i can, that is another senseless thing to say and accuse. And everything else you said came from you paranoid head, You might know about European swordmanship but I doubt you even use them.

What people can do with practically with a sword, I can do so much more effectively with a gun. Swords aren't practical weapons anymore, and I don't personally understand why they would be used as such.

Ok you said that european techniques are being rediscovered. Old techniques from recent findings hmmm..... You are saying like that it became really old because people before find it useless and forget about it. You said yourself. You are not careful.

There were a wide variety of reasons that European martial arts disappeared for quite some time. There never was the same culutural status associated with swords that the Japanese eventually gave the katana. During the Victorian era, there was a motion from all facets of life to declare that you were now elegant, as compared to your crude past. And yes, I stated it become useless and people began to forget about it - because it did. The Europeans never placed that same cultural status that the Japanese did on their katanas, and there was little reason to keep using swords when their guns and cannons could kill eachother so much more effectively. The Japanese found their's useless too you know. Gunpowder eventually made swords useless, although it did take some time before it was common enough in various areas for this to actually be the case.

What was the difference between Japanese and European martial arts though? During the Victorian era, there was a motion to call the past old and crude, and to glorify the future. This too was the case with swordfighting, and the fencers of the day were among the first to rather ignorantly bash the middle age swordfighters. It had nothing to do with fact, but was based upon the idea that they were trying to live up to that Victorian ideal.

You know what you really are an idiotic piece of crap. No doubt about it. Another thing, you just felt insulted because you know that you can't use a rapier against a katana so you choose a gun. Even so what are you going to use pellets and water? And is it has to take you three bullets to take someone down? Idiot. This isn't the west we got no time for fake **** and ineffective piece of crap, we leave it that to commercialization. Lastly, if you can put up shut up.

No, it actually is a strong sign of immaturity and defensiveness out of you that you can do nothing but insult me, and that in turn is a good sign that you are losing this arguement. In all truth, I could fight one just as effectively with a rapier as with a katana, but I personally would be smart, and just use a gun. It works so much better than any sword I've ever known, and you hardly have to pull the trigger.

I would very much take a rapier up against a katana. I'd have a very fair chance, and although I doubt this fight would be slanted towards me due to my equipment, the rapier is still just as capable of a sword as a katana. It was made for a different purpose.

So, act a little less childish, a little more mature, and we can continue talking. You are the one who feels insulted, you have also stated that yourself, and your childish insults are doing nothing to win your ignorant arguement. Arrogance doesn't work either.

 

[KenpoTess]

MOD NOTE
Warning~!
Refrain from Personal Attacks- If you have issues with someone Take them Offline via Email or PM~!

~Tess
MT S. MOD