histories greatest fighter.

[Thedayrecker]

You can't really pick "The best", because they're better in different situations. A Samurai one on one with a Spartan Hoplite would win for sure... but that's just it. A Spartan would never fight alone. They were trained to fight in phalynx formation, and if they were fighting alone then something has gone horribly wrong.

Also I'd like to point out Spartans were the biggest dicks in history, no matter what 300 says.

EDIT:Or this:

 

[jamesworkshop]

for a while now i have always considered the Samurai to be the greatest warrior/fighter in the history of mankind for his training fighting style, and discipline. now i wonder what others consider to be the greatest warrior, please tell me who you consider the best fighter ever. rules: must be a real fighter. can be from any time period. give two reasons why you think they are the best. no chuck Norris (we already know he is the best his ego needs no more inflation.

in historical context its quite unfair to pit different warriors seperated, othen by centurys and half the planet away to other since weapons and fighting styles were intendid to fight the enemies of the day not enemys that would never be encountered since they would quite quickly adapt to them militarys have always been extremly pragmatic in that reguard.

In life and death combat what works and what doesn't becomes very obvious.

Otherwise its really these guys the Mongols that steal the show in being the best warriors of ancient history

"It's estimated that 15 million died in the Mongols' five-year invasion of central Asia"
Jack Weatherford, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World (2004)

Thats how big their empire became.

Really the only mark of military strenght is victory on the battlefield and few can really compare to a military that held the largest contiguous empire ever in human history.

 

[HotFezz8]

Mr. T.

'nuff said.

Fool.

chuck norris.

 

[Exia91]

Mr. RoundHouseKick

Chuck jokes aside, Histories greatest fighter?

TMNT hands down! they are part of history!

 

[Mr.Kitetsu]

hmmm I would say... that guy who invented the bushido

 

[Red Right Hand]

Nothing could best a Spartan, they were born to fight and raised to fight and with those massive shileds not even a Ninja with his magic tricks could beat a Spartan.

Against a single Spartan? Probably not, as their true strength lay in the formation. Yes they were probably good at fighting by themselves but not nearly to the extent that other forms of warriors could achieve. This is because they were trained to fight one on one, spartans weren't, their focus lay on fighting in a formation and their weapons and armour were designed to maximise the effectiveness of the formation.

OT: I would go with Celtic warriors such as William Wallace, basically because they painted themselves blue and charged headfirst into the enemy like crazy motherfuckers. Awesome. Also because they beat two or three, I can never remember, significantly larger and better equipped English armies.

 

[Hazzaslagga]

I would say if it was a one on one with the weapons they used, on foot, and with no range weapons. most of them could have a chance of winning.(don't forget a great variety of skill or talent difference within a soldier class).e.g the samurai versus the spartan the fight could go either way. I'd like to give honorable mentions to the Bezerkergang. They were brutal MOtherf*****s.

 

[The Great Sage]

Mongols - as they are were the pinnacle of the nomadic warrior tradition and its mastery of the horse and bow. That combined with some of the greatest military minds and superb organization showed their absolute dominance.

 

[Gingerman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLWzH_1eZsc&feature=player_embedded

For all you Katana folk out there.

Personally? I'd say a 17th century European sword fighter. Because? well in Europe there was several different fighting styles that evolved as new weapons and techniques were being made. Where as the fabled idiotic Samurai had this sword that they only used as a last resort (they preferred bows are spears oddly enough)

Again I'm really tired of all this stupid animeisd fantasy people are under these days. If they were so good how did the Samurai not fend off the Portuguese swords men when they landed on Japans shores (admittingly they did have guns bit still they didn't put up much of a fight).

I would construct a larger argument here but it really is a lost cause as a history book will do a better job than I can.

Edit: That said though Mongolians were pretty damn good horse back fighters. Would say they'd be the winners if it was a mounted 1v1 battle.

 

[crudus]

I am going with Spartans on this one. They are heavily armed and heavily armored. Some of their armor could even be used as a weapon! They were raised to kill from a young age. There really isn't beating that.

Spartans were pretty much a warrior race. Pretty much built for killing from birth.

But they never really went to war, so it's difficult to say how deadly they really were.

Uhhh, what? There was this time when Persia tried to invade Greece. A movie was made about part of one of the battles. Also that war with Athens. Lets not forget during the fall of the Spartan empire they were basically mercenaries.

 

[Caligulove]

The only proof you need:

Spoiler: Black Dynamite!

 

[jamesworkshop]

Depends on the situation and the skills called for.

Single weapon combat, I'll take a samurai over just about every single other trained warrior in the history of the world. Best idea? Probably not, but I like 'em, and katana have been proven to shear straight through plate metal.


[sub]Welcome to the Internet, where the men are men, the women are men and the children are FBI agents. --Unattributed[/sub]

Have to call you out on that for two very simple reasons one for that to be true Katanas would have to be able to cut through each other which they can't and the armour of other Samurais which also did a good job of not getting cut in half by Katanas.

The problem is not sharpness but blade geometry the blade is too thick and wedge shaped to cut through a material you need to move material aside to allow the blade to pass, heat tempered carbon steel will pinch and trap the blade.

get a flat sheet of metal and saw half way down the middle then grab each side and pull outwards and you'll see why no bladed weapon can cut metal.

Not that that would bother a Samurai since the Yari (spear) and Tantô (double sided dagger) were far more effective anti-armour weapons available to them

 

[BlumiereBleck]

Octavian, stabbed many times, deathly sick but still kicked ass.

 

[sunburst]

Sun Tzu is the obvious winner. He invented fighting.