Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

who would win this fight in a 1:1

a roman gladiator has his armors , shield and his sword

vs

a samurai has his armors and a katanna

i think a roman gladiator would win since he has better defense
but what do u guys think?

um....Samurai.

But they'd be nothing compared to me.

2guns

u must be a god

Wrong forum for this you know?

What kind of Gladiator do you mean? A murmillones? A andabatae? A laquerii?


There's more to it then just a Gladtiator.

Samurai, MUCH faster and dexterous.

It has been proven through cadavers found that Gladiators where obesse

Originally posted by Koala MeatPie
Samurai, MUCH faster and dexterous.

It has been proven through cadavers found that Gladiators where obesse

Not obese, just bulky with muscle from their training. It has been proven that instead of losing weight before a match, they would actually gain it.

N00B!!!!, what a dumb question.
the samurai would OWN

A functional Katana would be sharp enough to cut through his armor either way, and totally eliminate this gladiator quickly before the gladiator even moves.

So Samurai FTW!!

Samurai with a katana: Win, win, and WIN!



The world's best katana has enough force to be able to cut through ten bodies with a single concentrated stroke. It costs $10,000 or more.

thats sharp!

Originally posted by DarkC
Samurai with a katana: Win, win, and WIN!



The world's best katana has enough force to be able to cut through ten bodies with a single concentrated stroke. It costs ,000 or more.

Yeah, and not only that but a real Katana weighs about 15 lbs. Some even 20 lbs. And a Samurai is trained to be fast, so to move a sword that weighs that much and still move fast. I'm gonna say the Samurai wins, because it's extreme speed in great control.

Gladiators, were mostly slaves, made to fight mostly against their will, while Samurai were elite trained warriors. (and the off spin of those who were bandits were ninjas)

Anywho - what samurai would lack in armour he would more than make up for in skill.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Gladiators, were mostly slaves, made to fight mostly against their will, while Samurai were elite trained warriors. (and the off spin of those who were bandits were ninjas)

Anywho - what samurai would lack in armour he would more than make up for in skill.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Gladiators were not trained like Samurai's so therefore i think the Samurai would kill the Gladiator easily.

Most samurai were also highly adept archers too, which gives them another obvious advantage.

Originally posted by jacobo0o
who would win this fight in a 1:1

a roman gladiator has his armors , shield and his sword

vs

a samurai has his armors and a katanna

i think a roman gladiator would win since he has better defense
but what do u guys think?

Samurai would have to strike in an open area of the armor. Katana's are great swords...but they may not resist the mighty blow of a Gladiators blade.

Now if you want to make it interesting.....change it to a Veteran Gladiator vs. a Shogun and the fight would be much more difficult.

Well, if the Samurai was a ronin. They could both lose.

Whether it's a ronin or not makes no difference in its skill. A ronin is just a samurai without a master.