Rapier or Katana?

Question

If you picked to top fighters that used these swords who would win. While the Katana was designed to be used in styles that were very effective in one on one sword combat. The Rapier was used in styles that involed a lot of dodging instead of parrying, something the Katana was not designed to be effective against since most attacks were wide slashes.

Any imput would be nice, Iv been arguing with my friend about this for a while.

Answer 1

katana. trust me i am a sword smith.

Answer 2

Read this essay. It's from TheARMA, which is a group that still practices medieval swordsmanship.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/katanavs.h...

You seem to have some misconceptions about the Katana. It isn't all 'wide slashing,' and Kenjutsu emphasizes evasion just as much -- if not more -- than parrying. The myth of blade-to-blade blocking runs rampant nowadays, but despite this, it was not the norm to perform hard-blocks. Doing so would quickly damage the sword.



Furthermore, Rapiers used parries just as much as footwork. If you consider the fact that it was primarily a thrusting weapon, you would have to appreciate the parrying would be the most viable defense alongside good footwork.

As for who would win, I honestly cannot say. I had practiced kenjutsu for almost 2 years and I had also cross trained in some sabre (not fencing sabre). It gave me a better idea of what to expect when going against a rapier, so when I did, I did pretty well.

However, I was forced to modify my style greatly and fight a lot more conservatively than I otherwise would. If a Kenjutsuka who was ignorant of the rapiers use went against a conservative rapier-wielding swordsman, he would get picked apart just because his techniques are inherently slower.

Read this essay. It's from TheARMA, which is a group that still practices medieval swordsmanship.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/katanavs.h...

You seem to have some misconceptions about the Katana. It isn't all 'wide slashing,' and Kenjutsu emphasizes evasion just as much -- if not more -- than parrying. The myth of blade-to-blade blocking runs rampant nowadays, but despite this, it was not the norm to perform hard-blocks. Doing so would quickly damage the sword.



Furthermore, Rapiers used parries just as much as footwork. If you consider the fact that it was primarily a thrusting weapon, you would have to appreciate the parrying would be the most viable defense alongside good footwork.

As for who would win, I honestly cannot say. I had practiced kenjutsu for almost 2 years and I had also cross trained in some sabre (not fencing sabre). It gave me a better idea of what to expect when going against a rapier, so when I did, I did pretty well.

However, I was forced to modify my style greatly and fight a lot more conservatively than I otherwise would. If a Kenjutsuka who was ignorant of the rapiers use went against a conservative rapier-wielding swordsman, he would get picked apart just because his techniques are inherently slower.

EDIT:

Kempo Jujutsu, I disagree with a lot of what you've said. If you came across a samurai in armor, its unlikely that he'd be using his katana against you. Why? Because armor is for the battlefield, and contrary to popular belief, the katana was not.

If you were in the midst of an all out battle, samurai would be wielding bows + arrows or polearms. Many forget/are unaware of the fact that Samurai were archers first and foremost during war time. No sword -- Japanese or otherwise -- was as effective or favored as arrows or spears for actual large-scale combat.

As for a Samurai taking down a Rapier wielding opponent and then jamming a knife into him, that's purely ridiculous. Even if we forget the fact that he'd be bum-rushing a guy with a big sharp piece of metal, you have to appreciate that weapons-range would afford more than enough space to avoid a takedown. The rule for effective takedowns is that you must be able to touch your opponent to shoot -- for the legs or for the clinch. In a sword fight, both opponents will be far beyond that range and attempting a takedown would be the equivalent of diving on to the tip of the enemy's sword.

As for the ratio of good Japanese swordsman to good fencers, you pulled that out of your butt.

Also, you say that the Rapier wielding swordsman would instinctively raise his blade to hard-block the katana only to have it snapped in half. Also untrue, if both combatants are excellent swordsmen -- as is according to the asker's given scenario. Even a mid-level swordsman would employ footwork, a parry, a beat, or an angled block before attempting to hardblock an oncoming blade. Why? Because its ingrained into their reflexes from day one.

To say what you did is to suggest that all of their training would go out the window. Either that or you are woefully ignorant of swordsmanship technique, because as I've mentioned earlier, hard-blocking wasn't the norm in any style -- unless shields were involved. But even if was to happen by circumstance, even a decent swordsman would make sure to block with the third of his blade closest to the hilt. In terms of leverage and fortitude, that area was strongest and could withstand a direct blow.

as for Sheinara, neither rapiers nor sabres were 'battlefield swords,' in the sense everyone here seems to be thinking of them. In a real battle with armor and stuff, neither blade would be qualify.  The sabre found battlefield popularity after armor had been discarded and the rapier was a civilian weapon.

The same is true of the katana. Its battlefield counterpart was the tachi, which had slightly different proportions. But the katana that so many of you love and adore found popularity during relatively peaceful times, not during war.

Answer 3

the better fighter would win

you can't make an equasion of a fight just based upon the factors of the weapon.

the fighter is always the most determening factor in a fight.

Answer 4

You can do more damage with a Katana and you can also parry with it.

Answer 5

I would like to use the thing called "gun".

Answer 6

My team will have a video out on July 15th demonstrating the 8 basic cuts of Iaido as well as the drawing and sheathing of the Katana.  http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseac... is the link.  We only have a nun-chucks technique video on there for right now, but we'll be adding all kinds of weapons based videos as well jujitsu based self-defense for the streets.

Keep an eye out for it man.

Answer 7

i agree the better fighter would win

one thing though...a rapier is largely a practice weapon. english fencers in a real fight in mideival times probably wouldnt use a rapier. a rapier is a practically edgeless straight sword used for thrusting in fights with NO ARMOR. other than thrusting and parrying its useless as swords go.

to me its more of a training sword. the sword a real fencer would likely use would be much more like a katana...probably lighter and thinner (much like a marine corps sword if you've seen them...or a "pirate" sword) ...really quite similar in design.

however the beauty of an authentic katana is the blending of two different types of steel...one inside the other...on the outside it is a high carbon steel for strength and a very sharp edge. on the inside is a lower carbon steel which allows the blad to flex a bit ..thus absorbing impact better.

trust me a japanese swordsman does as much, if not more dodging and angling as anyone eles...they are regarded by most as the greatest swordsmen who ever lived (personally i think the filipinos will give em a good run) ....a good user of a katana...can literally cut you in half with it if the opportunity arises.

personally i agree the best fighter would win...but its kind of hard to find really good fencers...good japanese swordsmen are a dime a dozen.

there are also very fundamental differences in usage. a fencer moves in straight lines...and slight angles. a samurai moves in a different way. also in all likelyhood if you fought a samurai...he'd be wearing his armor. the katana is more of a slashing or cutting blade...its very hard to actually remove your blade from someones body. which is one reason why the rapier is so thin ..ie..easier to remove.

also remember...a japanese swordsman carries up to 3 blades at a time!! ..he also has jujutsu...he isnt necessarily going to stand there and fence with you. he may take you down and jam his tanto in your ribs, and while you're in agony cut your head off.

if the japanese warrior of feudal japan were good at anything, it was at making things simpler. they'd take influences from chinese arts...and make them simpler...and over the years they evolved rather simple yet sophisticated martial arts.

in a moment of panic..having a katana rapidly descenting toward your head....you put the rapier up to block instinctively...he cuts right through your sword and cuts you anyway.

i saw a video once of a kenjutsu guy against an english straight sword and the kenjutsu guy ate the straight sword guy alive.

generally speaking...id personally give the edge to the katana both as a weapon...and as a fighting art(s) ...the fencer best be d**n good.

but also there are different styles of fighting with a katana. iaido/iaijutsu/battojutsu...are more like a sudden attack where you have to draw your sword and cut simultaneously. whereas kenjutsu is a battlefield system where you know you're going into battle and already have your sword drawn.

Answer 8

Like others have said, it depends on the swordsman. Besides, as far as I know, the feared Spanish rapier experts of old used to fight with either a dagger or a buckler in the off hand for defense, thus making them more formidable. But if we're talking of using a sword exclusively, the katana is better compared to a rapier in my opinion in a fight against multiple opponents, the slashing weapon is way more practical in a crowded battlefield compared to a thrusting weapon.

Answer 9

the katana was a blocking sword

as the rapier was a genaeral purpose sword

you have to add in the area the sword play was taking place

at a guess I would say the katana at court close combat

rapier outdoors

Answer 10

A rapier is more fragile and much less versatile than a katana. If I fought a man with a rapier, I could break it with my katana. I can stab or slash with it much more effectively than with a rapier.