So why does this (stupid) show get a forum? And are we really considering this "analysis" anything other than entertainment? And regardless of the opinion of the show, shouldn't it be a sub-forum of The Rec Room?
Why?
- Thread starter Blindside
- Start date
I like the premise of the show, though it is entertaining while sometimes off base and inaccurate.
Part of my thinking here is to take a more serious look at the various warrior types throughout history, examine them in-depth and look more at their techniques, arms and armours. For the moment, it's focused on this 1 show, but I've seen several other shows in the same vein, and welcome combining their info as well.
If it turns into a entertainment rather than martial exploration, I'll move the whole area under entertainment. For now, I'm more interested in looking at the martial arts and combat aspects these types of shows bring up.
Part of my thinking here is to take a more serious look at the various warrior types throughout history, examine them in-depth and look more at their techniques, arms and armours. For the moment, it's focused on this 1 show, but I've seen several other shows in the same vein, and welcome combining their info as well.
If it turns into a entertainment rather than martial exploration, I'll move the whole area under entertainment. For now, I'm more interested in looking at the martial arts and combat aspects these types of shows bring up.
Omar B
Senior Master
Yeah, I don't see the need for this show having it's own sub-forum at all. I don't run the place though, so really it's not my call.
I do find the show highly inaccurate at times and overly concerned with weaponry over the warriors themselves. There's a show on Nat Geo that takes a close look at special forces of different kinds and operating arenas which I think is way closer to the mark. Heck, they practically froze a sniper then had him shoot, the baked him under hot lights and asked him to do the same, or subjecting pilots to operational level g-forces. Very rarely does DW take into account the level of preparedness these warriors have.
I do find the show highly inaccurate at times and overly concerned with weaponry over the warriors themselves. There's a show on Nat Geo that takes a close look at special forces of different kinds and operating arenas which I think is way closer to the mark. Heck, they practically froze a sniper then had him shoot, the baked him under hot lights and asked him to do the same, or subjecting pilots to operational level g-forces. Very rarely does DW take into account the level of preparedness these warriors have.
This show was from a technical stand point terrible with many so called experts being well very limited in their level of expertise. The show in and of itself is an epic fail to most serious martial practitioners. Yet I do understand Bob's desire to utilize it as a spring board to spur discussion! 
What's the name of the show? I'd like to take a peek at it, maybe bring some of their info into play here.
Keep in mind, I'm using this as a spring board. In 6 months, the sections name might be changed, the mission expanded or shifted etc.
I think some of the match ups are poor, the weapon choices odd, and the scenarios presented strange, however I do like the idea of identifying a particular culture and times "warriors", their arms and armour, looking at their training and mindsets, then arguing who could kick the others ***.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #6
Fight Science
The final scenarios are jokes. They some how put their two "deadly warriors" up against each other, running through the various weapons in sequence.
For the historic weapons... I've not been hugely impressed by the skills shown.
Fight Science is OK -- but it's got lots of the same problems. They're "experts" aren't necessarily experts with the weapons when it comes to historic weapons. When they do stuff with modern weapons/warriors, like elite military forces, it's better. But some of their tests are bizarre, to say the least. They often seem like they're out to show a particular result, and gear the test to that. (Like one with capoeria and other martial arts, on a weird moving platform...)
They're interesting TV. Fight Science is a bit better on the science side... but neither are going out of their way to do "good" science. They're making TV.
For the historic weapons... I've not been hugely impressed by the skills shown.
Fight Science is OK -- but it's got lots of the same problems. They're "experts" aren't necessarily experts with the weapons when it comes to historic weapons. When they do stuff with modern weapons/warriors, like elite military forces, it's better. But some of their tests are bizarre, to say the least. They often seem like they're out to show a particular result, and gear the test to that. (Like one with capoeria and other martial arts, on a weird moving platform...)
They're interesting TV. Fight Science is a bit better on the science side... but neither are going out of their way to do "good" science. They're making TV.
I'm not impressed with the final "show" in DW. The scenarios are often quite implausible IMO, and the theatrics just that. Nice show, but, eh on realism.
The tests sometimes seem decent, other times I just shake my head. Some things are obvious (an icepick compared to a sai, sai of course is going to do more damage. It's longer, heavier and the guys got 2 of em.). The scoring seems based a lot on opinion as well.
I much preferred the tests Mike Lodes did in Weapons the Made Britain, which were much more detailed.
The tests sometimes seem decent, other times I just shake my head. Some things are obvious (an icepick compared to a sai, sai of course is going to do more damage. It's longer, heavier and the guys got 2 of em.). The scoring seems based a lot on opinion as well.
I much preferred the tests Mike Lodes did in Weapons the Made Britain, which were much more detailed.
Fight Science is pretty interesting, you can see many segments from the show on Youtube. They've done some interesting tests, like which style has the best punch or kick. Of course their testing method leaves a lot to be desired, but it's entertaining.
Omar B
Senior Master
What he said. It's 4/20 today and I totally spaced on the name.
Last edited:
Bruno@MT
Senior Master
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2009
- Messages
- 3,399
- Reaction score
- 74
This show was from a technical stand point terrible with many so called experts being well very limited in their level of expertise. The show in and of itself is an epic fail to most serious martial practitioners. Yet I do understand Bob's desire to utilize it as a spring board to spur discussion!
If this is the show I've seen where they compare 2 warriors of different time / place... yes, it sucked big time. I didn't realize how bad it was until I watched ninja vs spartan. They didn't even have anyone form an X kan, they had a neo ninja and a seedy looking asian fellow as the ninja team, using weapons like that ninja-to that never actually existed....
It hurt me to watch, and in the end I was so glad that the ninja got crunched by the spartan.
All I know is the show is simply for entertainment and a place where I can laugh and argue over what they say.
Now Fight Science seems to be a better show.
Now Fight Science seems to be a better show.
punisher73
Senior Master
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2004
- Messages
- 3,959
- Reaction score
- 1,058
That got me as well when watching it. They used a weapon that only existed in the 80's ninja movies. Would have helped them out more to actually use a katana.
la la la
I turned off the cable 2 years ago; so, this show doesn't stress me.
I like Fight Quest, though. I watch that on NetFlix.
I turned off the cable 2 years ago; so, this show doesn't stress me.
I like Fight Quest, though. I watch that on NetFlix.
You mean, there is no such thing as a ninto? But....I saw it once in a book. lol
Gaius Julius Caesar
Black Belt
The show is a trainwreck that you can't help but watch because it is an interesting subject.
The problems are many, including the little geek who enters the data, his oppinions are less than useless he has no MA background and appears to know jack about History.
I love how a big cleave of something impresses them more than most stabs and they only repect stabs that go through thwe body. These idiots do not know that the Romans did much of their conquering with troops who wer trained to stick about 3 inches of their blade into the body, pull out and move on. It's estimated that the Galdus had killed more people in war than any other hand held weapon untill the AK-47.
All the same, you sometimes see great stuff like Delongis with a Claymore or the Spartan reinacters.
When the show came out I joked "They should do the IRA vs. Al-Queda." well they pretty much did. LOL!
The problems are many, including the little geek who enters the data, his oppinions are less than useless he has no MA background and appears to know jack about History.
I love how a big cleave of something impresses them more than most stabs and they only repect stabs that go through thwe body. These idiots do not know that the Romans did much of their conquering with troops who wer trained to stick about 3 inches of their blade into the body, pull out and move on. It's estimated that the Galdus had killed more people in war than any other hand held weapon untill the AK-47.
All the same, you sometimes see great stuff like Delongis with a Claymore or the Spartan reinacters.
When the show came out I joked "They should do the IRA vs. Al-Queda." well they pretty much did. LOL!
JohnnyEnglish
Green Belt
I agree, this show might be fun to watch for a 14 years old, but for an adult with martial arts backround and maybe even military or law enforcment backround, or just an adult with some knowledge, this show is utter BS.
