Deadliest Warrior

I'm conflicted about Deadliest Warrior. Let me explain why. The premise of the show is to pit two warriors against each other to see who is, as the title says, the deadliest warrior. The warriors range from primitive but fierce maori warriors to modern special forces. Of course, they don't pit ancient warriors against modern ones, as that wouldn't be much of a fight, but most pairings are still pretty dumb.

If you want to test the efficiency and lethality of different warriors, you have to take into account all the aspects of their war culture. However, this is understandably very hard to test. Still, this makes some of the contests very uneven, which kind of defeats the purpose of the show. Now the pairings are mostly fine, but they could be better.

The geographic variations are of little consequence but the historical variations can cause great disparities. And sometimes the missed tactical implications are enormous. Worst example is perhaps the Roman Centurion vs. the Indian Rajput Warrior. The Rajputs fought as individuals, but the Romans fought as a unit, never as individuals. In the test however, the Centurion was alone. Naturally this led to the Rajput winning with ease, and they even admitted it. Why test the fight if one side really can't win? Sure they run the computer simulations a thousand times to factor out lucky blows, but some fights are pointless.

Another thing they fail to take into account is the difference in warrior roles. A good example is the Samurai vs. Viking episode. Now the Samurai won, but it was a pretty close fight. Add to that the fact that the samurai is an elite warrior, whilst the viking is a regular joe. Warriors as well as sailors and farmers. If an average member of a culture can fight an elite warrior almost to a stand still, who really is the deadliest?

The differences in weapons and gear is usually the deciding factor, but not always. Some fights can be really surprising and quite entertaining, tough most of the modern fights are usually pretty dull, not to mention sometimes in pretty poor taste. Somali Pirates vs. Medellin Cartel? IRA vs. Taliban? Yeah, a bit too soon, as they say.

So why do I watch it? The weapon tests, that's why. Both from a writers as well as a roleplayers perspective, the tests are very valuable. Can you cut a man in half with a single blow? With the right weapon and traning you can! Can a chainshirt stop a katana? Yupp. The wielder of the katana cut two pigs in half with one blow, and managed to both draw and slice through three rolled up tatami mats in one movement, but the chain shirt stopped him in his tracks. I never would have guessed, but now I know. That's why I watch it.

The show was cancelled after three seasons, so what you see is what there is. If you can make it past the stupidity, it's well worth watching.

Warning! The following clip is very bloody. Watch at your own discretion!