Tonight on SPIKE

Posted April 07, 2009 | 142 comments

Deadliest Warrior

Blood on the Sand: Apache vs Gladiator

Sweet! Welcome to my pre-show blog for Deadliest Warrior. I'm Max Geiger, the show's simulations expert. Every week that a new show airs, I'll be looking at both fighters in that show's matchup. I'll do a quick rundown of what makes each combatant such a threat to the other, and examine why this matchup is interesting beyond the sheer carnage we'll be witnessing. Our goal on the show is to use scientific testing and real world data to determine who is deadliest (and why). But we can't hand our warrior experts knives and tell them to have at it (quick and dirty, but a little too messy).

Instead, we're turning to modern computing for a solution, which means running a simulation to decide the winner of our matchup. I'm the guy who runs our simulation 1,000 times to determine which warrior is the most lethal, and I get to dig deep into the guts of how and why each fighter won-at what range, with which weapons, and just how brutal his final strike was. I'm pumped about the first week's matchup: Apache versus Gladiator. It's time to break down what makes each fighter tick, and see if we can't learn something cool about each of one.

First up, let's step into the gladiator's head. What we're about to do with science and computers, gladiators did on the sands of Rome 2,000 years ago. Our gladiator is entering this fight with a couple of big advantages-first, he's wearing armor, and second, his weaponry will be surprising to the Apache. Gladiators typically fought in a "character" with a specific set of armor and weaponry against a gladiator using a different loadout. These "characters" often reflected the warriors of a nation Rome had conquered, so our gladiator will be pretty much prepared for anything. For our purposes, we've chosen a blend of these types that will offer our gladiator the best balance of protection, mobility, and the ability to carry a full loadout of weapons into battle. Considering that the Apache fought unarmored opponents, this should give the gladiator a line of defense that's tough to crack, but will also present a psychological barrier. Secondly, the gladiator carries some pretty exotic weaponry-his trident, net, sica, and even cestus (say the "c" like a "k"- it's Latin for "fist" and yeah, the Romans were hardcore about their language) are all different from the weapons an Apache would have seen in the hands of other tribes or even the American and Mexican armies. Our gladiator's got some solid defense and a set of unique offensive weapons on his side, which makes for a pretty solid one-two punch.

On the other hand, the Apache has one very big advantage: range. There’s a reason the bow was the distance weapon to beat until the gun came along. Even then, due to the bow’s reliability, black powder weapons didn’t immediately replace it in history or on the battlefield. The ability to kill from a distance is a powerful one, and something we shouldn’t neglect. While the Apache’s other weapons are a bit utilitarian, it’s important to remember that we’re comparing the warriors behind the weaponry, and that individual skills and tactics cannot be discounted. In the United States’ final campaign against Geronimo, a force of 5,000 soldiers was deployed to pursue a band of 36 men, women, and children. That’s roughly 139 to 1, and that 1 might have easily been a child. While it is impossible to input bravery into a simulation, it is clear to me that with odds like that, only a fool would discount our Apache’s fighting spirit and guerrilla tactics. Taking those factors into account, it’s hard not to see how the tomahawk or even the humble knife could be transformed into a perfect killing tool in the Apache’s hands..

There are a lot of factors in play here, and it's too easy to say that this is a battle of armor vs. distance killing, or speed vs. power. Tactical nuance is a big factor here, and I'll leave you with this final thought to consider: perhaps this battle isn't about strength vs. speed, but instead, this fight is about what happens when you pit a hardened generalist and seasoned guerilla tactician with good tools against a consummate specialist trained to kill with a variety of exotic and exceptionally lethal weapons.

All that said, after the show, do me a favor and leave a comment here: Geoff, Armand, and I are always curious to get some feedback about the job we did, and we'd like to hear from you.

Morituri te salutant,
Max

Max Geiger is a game designer and graduate of USC's Interactive Media Division. He's worked on a variety of projects, including a casual MMO, a game about congressional redistricting, and a simulator for the United States Army.

 

Comments (142)
  • FoodofYoshi's Profile
    +1 Vote UpVote Down

    1. FoodofYoshi Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 11:52 AM

    Sounds cool. I think the gladiator's going to kick his ass!

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • smpd435
    +1 Vote UpVote Down

    2. smpd435 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 12:48 PM

    Will we be seeing modern special forces types such as Navy SEALs, British SAS/SBS, German KSK/GSG9 and Combat Swimmers? How about our toughest units in World War 2 against the tough guys from Germany and Japan? Rangers/Marine Raiders/Devils Brigade against Jap marines and Nazi Waffen SS and such.



    How about indians like the crow and Mohicans.



    How about the Ninja against other asian martial artists like the shaolin temple fighter guys. I forgot what they are called. Swordsman against swordsman... Samuri vs. the best european knights.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Romulocks's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    3. Romulocks Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 3:14 PM

    I'm really excited for this show. Particularly this episode.

    Cannot wait to see the tech you guys apply, and amount of sheer force behind these cuts and impacts.

    My money would be on the gladiator. I think the shield would block the arrows relatively easily, and once the space between them was breached, the Apache would be severely messed up.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • KnightsTemplar's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    4. KnightsTemplar Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 4:31 PM

    yeah one of the simulations experts called my local radio show this morning and explained the show. They are going to mix up fights between ancient and modern warriors. That means we might see a marine fighting a spartan.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Romulocks's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    5. Romulocks Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 7:26 PM

    They have already announced every sparring session I believe. The show has already been filmed and finished.

    Shaka Zulu vs. William Wallace, Spetznaz vs. Green Beret, etc etc...

    The pairings are up on the website. They aren't going to deviate from that list at all...stop the dreams.

    It's Spartan vs. Ninja...enough with the debate.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • goodrichm21's Profile
    +4 Vote UpVote Down

    6. goodrichm21 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 7:55 PM

    I dont care what the show says. the bow and arrow isn't allowed in the arena. besides not only did Romans have the bow and arrow, they had better bows and arrows. not that the obsidian would have penetrated an armored breast plate or helmet anyway. Apache were light infantry and the gladiator were heavy. you don't counter heavy infantry with with light infantry, you counter with cavalry, and the Apache didn't have horses until Europeans brought them

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • goodrichm21's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    7. goodrichm21 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:01 PM

    this show is horse shit. i noticed that those punches straight to the face with that glove had no effect even though the test showed that the punches were lethal. how exactly did they come to this conclusion? the end where they were adding up kills made no sense to me.

    and i could have kicked the shit out of those two little Indians.

    9 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • hecubus23's Profile
    +5 Vote UpVote Down

    8. hecubus23 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:04 PM

    Just watched gladiator vs. Apache and the gladiator stopped when he had the Apache on the ground? Are we being a little culturally sensitive? After I saw some idiot with no armor win against a professional warrior, I turned the channel. The Weather Channel was more entertaining.

    2 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • MephistopholesX's Profile
    +10 Vote UpVote Down

    9. MephistopholesX Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:16 PM

    I'm sorry, but I'm calling BS on that simulation. When they actually showed the battle between the Apache and the gladiator, the gladiator eventually took the Apache down with his shield and hit the Apache with the cestus twice; once in the chest and then the face. And... then.... he... just... got up? They reiterated throughout the show that they were both cultures that fought to the death. The gladiator would not have stopped hitting that Apache until he was dead. End of story. When Chuck was striking the cow carcass with the cestus, the doctor on the show said he pretty much broke the thing IN HALF. He broke the ribs and bone and everything. I was calling the Apache as the winner throughout the show, but when they showed the simulated battle... well, I'm calling BS.

    5 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • captainmorganblack's Profile
    +3 Vote UpVote Down

    10. captainmorganblack Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:16 PM

    That is the dumbest sh*t i have ever seen. the gladiator had the little bit** on the ground and he would have beaten the sh*t out of him, but for some reason ur stupid computer programme made him stop turning his head to burger.

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • wormstrikez88's Profile
    +6 Vote UpVote Down

    11. wormstrikez88 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:17 PM

    This is bull i hope you re-visit this garbage the Gladiator is a ruthless fighter with no means to stop the battle once the Apache hits the ground he is going to turn the Apache's skull into mince meat in a hurry. The Gladiator would not have been wandering the American west looking for a fight. But i would believe the the roman empire taking an Apache captive and forcing him to fight a Gladiator in the Arena nuff said.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • ChoctawWarrior's Profile
    -1 Vote UpVote Down

    12. ChoctawWarrior Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:17 PM

    next i want to see shawnees vs. millitia

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Wolftraxx's Profile
    +5 Vote UpVote Down

    13. Wolftraxx Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:18 PM

    okay, I just saw this show and am very disappointed, the whole show proved how the gladiator would just mess the apache up with their superior weapons and armor. At the end fight we have a gladiator who looked like he was fighting with down syndrome who couldn't hit the side of a barn. The only funny part about the whole show is how we had 2 pinner ass native americans who thought they were modern day warriors mouthing off how some bone rock and wood weapons could just take down a gladiator. Good luck ya prick. Somebody needs to tell them to gtfo. Who are these experts anyways? I sure hope they didn't have to go to college to get a degree or something.. because boy, they suck!

    2 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • goodrichm21's Profile
    +6 Vote UpVote Down

    14. goodrichm21 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:20 PM

    good call, i wonder if chuck lidell would just stop and get up when he has his opponent on the ground

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Romulocks's Profile
    +10 Vote UpVote Down

    15. Romulocks Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:22 PM

    Ok...I for one, understand the live simulation of statistical findings. It's an interesting way to put 1000 different simulations into one live-action fight.

    The show was fantastic...

    But I think the end result is ridiculous...pure nonsense. The Apache warrior's livelihood wasn't souly consumed in his ability to fight, such as was the gladiator's. A Gladiator trained for fourteen hours a day to be a dominatingly lethal warrior. The Apache had to hunt to feed his family and divided his time between other chores and responsibilities.

    Another HUGE problem with the findings. LOCATION people. LOCATION. Why in the fuck would a gladiator chase an Apache warrior in an open field just staring at him while he fired his bow and arrows at him??? Why does this fight not take place in a Roman arena? Or at least an enclosed space??

    I think for the findings to be less...well...stupid, you need to establish locations first.
    ie...divide the environments into three seperate categories, long range, mid range and short range. Then input the findings into each fighting environment. In a short enclosed space, don't even pretend an armored gladiator is going to end up fighting a knife fight for his life or in hand to hand combat. HE TRAINED FOURTEEN HOURS A DAY FOR JUST THAT SITUATION EXACTLY! He isn't going to let the Apache come with 5 feet of him without detaching an Apache limb in the process.

    Just my opinion. I'll be watching the show hoping the findings improve with time and more experience ;)

    4 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • wormstrikez88's Profile
    +5 Vote UpVote Down

    16. wormstrikez88 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:25 PM

    the ice man doesn't stop until the ref pulls him off no ref no stop

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • smpd435
    +1 Vote UpVote Down

    17. smpd435 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:35 PM

    I had my money on the Apache because of their ever adapting tactics and unrestricted weapons and styles.



    There is no debate.... If that is all the shows for this series, I am assuming or at least hoping there will be more than one season. For modern warriors I really believe in hand to hand combat, spetznaz would win. They are trained in a very brutal way and do very stupid, time wasting things just so they can be called stronger than regular russian soldiers. Where as a green beret is a much more useful and smarter soldier, he just isnt going to be as effective in hand to hand combat unless he is a specialist.



    I enjoyed the show and really like facts being put to the test in this way. I would certainly like to see more warrior cultures and fightings styles thrown into it.

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • jakecanada's Profile
    +5 Vote UpVote Down

    18. jakecanada Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:58 PM

    I watched this show and the whole thing is rather bogus. i mean the idea of this show is excellent who ever thought this up you did a great job. The people that are the experts pick sides. Like the person who inputs the data in the computer clearly picks who he thinks is gonna win then supposedly being unbiased enters the data. They have a gladiator fighting in the woods. When did this ever happen? His trident gets stuck in a tree dont remember a tree in an arena. I'm wondering why this was all played out to give the Apache an advantage. All i have to say your show is amusing and that's about it. Wouldn't you think that an Apache would massacre a gladiator at long range with his bow. But on the same token a gladiator with a trident and a net would kick the snot out of anyone with a knife. Maybe i'm wrong but then again i'm not the guy who stuck a gladiator in a forest.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • MephistopholesX's Profile
    +3 Vote UpVote Down

    19. MephistopholesX Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:58 PM

    I agree 100% on your breakdown of the Apache. Although a majority of their battles were fought with Mexico and the United States, the image of the Apache as a war-like, violent and brutish culture is pure historically sensationalized crap. They fought to protect their land and their people, and, when you are forced to protect what is closest to you, you tend to fight pretty viciously. , they fought out of necessity. Don't get me wrong they were extremely effective at what they did. As far as battle technique, I would say they are the "Ninja" Native American Culture. The gladiator on the other hand trained specifically for BATTLE. They were versed in both close quarters AND ranged combat. They were professional fighters. On that note, the location of the battle really wouldn't matter. Gladiators fought in all different types of environments. The Roman Colosseum was used for gladatorial games, mock sea battles, animal hunts, executions, etc. Battles and hunts were often staged amid elaborate sets with movable trees and entire buildings. These were usually done on a huge scale; some with contests involving up to a few thousand animals and an equal number of gladiators over the course of well over a hundred days. So the gladiators were pretty well versed in doing battle in any situation.

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Hastur45's Profile
    -1 Vote UpVote Down

    20. Hastur45 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 8:59 PM

    The show was pretty damn cool, I thought It would be all BS but they were pretty realistic and generally considered the variables.

    I agree that the gladiator would lose, the gladiator was an entertainer and in the situation of the final fight was presented in the indian would win because he can shoot plenty of arrows and first.
    but in an arena the gladiator would have a better chance.

    Now a legionary is actually well armoured and would win but thats a different story

    Only thing I didnt like is having the gladiator stop punching the guy as if he was looking around for a thumbs up or thumbs down LOL

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • smpd435
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    21. smpd435 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 9:22 PM

    Ok... indians in an arena would have been given the same weapons as the gladiator being that people chose who would have to fight the other with what. All to please the crowd. The gladiator stopping after punching him twice was for the thumb gesture to finish him as was a common crowd pleaser. On the indians turf, no big clanking shiny gladiator would surprise the indian. So the 2 arrows would be like 5. The gladiator some how was able to chase down a smaller, lighter, on average faster runner with all the stuff he had on? Also apache man never threw a knife or tomohawk at the gladiator as he would have especially if he felt cornered in the manner he was, Gladiator would also only have one or two weapons as he was given to carry where the apache would at the very least have one knive and one tomohawk and his bow. Maybe a spear that would allow him to have the thrusting range of the gladiator without having to use two hands to use the weapon. The gladiator was also fighting wounded from the start. Like they said the arrow played a big part in deciding the victory. I think the doc didnt realize the club still could cause blunt trauma on the first strike to the bronze helmet and even when arteries are split and brains are dying, humans have proven they can fight for minutes effectively with no heart beat and have fought for up to 10 seconds after being shot in the head. So the doc saying the apache would not be able to strike back after being hit with trident was not completely accurate in my book. Thats just my opinion.

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • tony1athome's Profile
    +2 Vote UpVote Down

    22. tony1athome Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 10:00 PM

    Bring on the Klingons!

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • jakecanada's Profile
    +5 Vote UpVote Down

    23. jakecanada Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 10:00 PM

    I cant believe people think the Apache would win, at long range the Apache would win. At close range the Gladiator would. Think of this me against you 2 untrained warriors i have a net and a trident you have a little bone knife Who do u think will win?

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • dave8211's Profile
    +4 Vote UpVote Down

    24. dave8211 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 10:46 PM

    To be honest i thought it was a entertaining program but that's about it. It is filled with historical inacuracies , such as the sica they said in the show that it was a widley use weapon , they were right but not for the reason's give. This wepon was more often than not actually a bent sword usually due to overuse or bad craftsmanship. One thing i did notice is that it was stated that most gladiators were slaves, which while true this was not always the case. Many were soldiers as well as even upper-class citizens. these games were often used to decide such things as family and political quarels. At the same time how-ever as far as the apache winning in the long end of the fight i don't beleive this is right because if they were such good warriors how could they have been conquered by far less warrior-like peoples such as britian, and france .

    4 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • gracie_pavelski's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    25. gracie_pavelski Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 11:03 PM

    That was intense!! Those guys were getting way too into it...kinda weird. But overall super cool show!!

    ps--was that David Wenham narrating??!!

    3 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Volntyr's Profile
    +1 Vote UpVote Down

    26. Volntyr Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 11:17 PM

    I saw the show and agree with most people here as far as the BS. First, the gladiator wouldnt have hit the opponent so lightly or stop for that matter. I was very suprised that when the trident got stuck, the gladiator stopped using it. Can we say Spear? Should have just fought on neutral ground like a marsh or hillside, not in the Apaches back yard.

    And that Snake Blocker character, he was just an ass. Sure, I can understand pride but please, give me a break



    Would have rather seen something like the Zulu or Gurkha against the Apache.

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Zealot951's Profile
    -6 Vote UpVote Down

    27. Zealot951 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 11:25 PM

    This show could not have come any sooner. Great job!!! BTW I made the Roman Cestus'. Check them out at www.myspace.com/knightscrossleatherworks. Add me to add u too. Nuff' said.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Bogus41
    -3 Vote UpVote Down

    28. Bogus41 Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 11:46 PM

    good stuff.. i like it!

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • MarkoC's Profile
    +5 Vote UpVote Down

    29. MarkoC Posted on Apr 7 '09 at 11:57 PM

    As someone with an avid interest in military history for over 15 years, here's my opinion. There are three deciding factors in combat: 1) skill and discipline, 2) technology and 3) tactics. In skill and discipline, while the Apache is no slouch, the advantage goes to the gladiator. First, in terms of skill, the gladiator trains all day every day, and has to, since both his life and fortune depend on it on a regular basis. He either wins or he dies. He also has no wife, no children, no family to worry about - only training and combat. In terms of discipline, he has most likely gone trough many one on one fights in different gladiatorial settings, and he is prepared to die every time he steps out. The Apache isn't. He is a warrior who depends on stealth and surprise. He is neither used to nor prepared for fighting to the death in an one on one open combat setting, which is exactly what the gladiator trains for. In terms of technology, the advantage again goes to the Gladiator. History has proven it - steel beats wood and stone. The bronze revolution is one of the pivotal points in the history of warfare. As for the bow and arrow, although it does provide a great advantage - it is something that the gladiators train to face with their shield, so the advantage is somewhat mitigated (but not completely - see tactics part). In terms of tactics, if we place the combat in the woods, then in a such a setting the Apache would most likely win every time for one simple reason - he would never face the gladiator. He would just outrun the armored fighter and ambush him with long range weapons and sneak attacks. And that would be that as they say. But, as I understand the premise of the show, it's about facing off two warriors in direct combat which would mean an arena of some kind. In such a case, the gladiator would most likely win it - that is after all, exactly his thing. The problem I see with this show is that, when pitting any two warriors the setting and circumstance is

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • FoodofYoshi's Profile
    -1 Vote UpVote Down

    30. FoodofYoshi Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 12:19 AM

    The net and trident did get noted as more powerful than the knives - I saw that. But the bow vs unarmored chest is huge for the Apache. I thought it was cool seeing what the weapons would do.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • LABraddah's Profile
    +5 Vote UpVote Down

    31. LABraddah Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 10:16 AM

    Pretty entertaining. But agree with some of the other posts that the after punching the Apache in the face, it was stupid for the Gladiator to stand up and gloat. I know it's choreographed and entertainment, but that was really retarded. Hope the future episodes are more believable. But still...overall, the 1st episode was pretty good.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Bullseen's Profile
    +4 Vote UpVote Down

    32. Bullseen Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 10:20 AM

    Good show, I thought the results were a bunch of bullcrap though.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • FoodofYoshi's Profile
    +2 Vote UpVote Down

    33. FoodofYoshi Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 11:09 AM

    Lots here about gladiators and ranged combat. Yes, the romans had bows and good ones - but they didn't fire them like the apache. Roman archers shot them into the air and they fell on armies. Apaches fired their bow at fast moving small game. Which is better in a close combat fight against a single enemy (not an army)?



    Gladiators were generally divided into weapon sets based on body type. Romans liked to see opposites fight - so they'd match a heavily armored tank with a short weapon (myrmillo) against a fast light unarmored opponent with a striking combo like the trident and net (retarius). Strength against weakness and distance weapons were pretty rare, because the crowd wanted the fight to be close and personal.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • neroshade's Profile
    +3 Vote UpVote Down

    34. neroshade Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 12:54 PM

    Lots of comments here already cover pretty much what I would say, but here are my big comments all the same:

    I loved the show. I don't care if people disagree with you and their reasons, because the show was entertaining.

    I understand that last fight was not, in any way the actual deciding fight. That was fight that showed all the weapons in use, it was meant to build up tension, show some action, and show them actually fight head on. Do I think that fight could have been better planed out? Yes. The gladiator and the Apache both did some things I thought would not have been done in an actual fight. I also agree that having the gladiator punch the Apache in the face was a bad call. maybe land a few body shots, not a ground a pound. I say that not because of historical this or technique that... but because it would have looked better on the show then a face slam.

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • neroshade's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    35. neroshade Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 12:55 PM

    As for the science, Good call on most things but I would really like to see a few thing handled better. For one, the consideration of technique is going to be hard for a computer to decide. Yes, you can input all the data on lethality and so on, but what if both fighters used knives, or swords, or spears? Its then going to be decided by which is the better technique, or it will just be a draw. (Yes you could argue a Katana is a better sword then the Bastard Sword, but really its a matter of opinion. In the end, they are both just as effective at accomplishing the same task.)

    Another thing that stuck out is the Helmet vs. Club test. You really needed to test what damage, if any, was being done to the head. Put something inside the head to test the blows. Can that blow damage the neck? Will that blow cause brain damage? Will it at least stun a fighter or knock him out?

    Keep in mind, helmets were made to protect from arrows and slashing weapons, mainly. Piercing, and bludgeoning weapons can still be effective against a helmet.

    I love that you run 1000 simulations. I love that you brought in experts. I love that you try to test as much as you can. I would love it more if you took it to another level. Leave no doubt, question everything. Don't stop at just testing lethality, consider how the weapon was used, (for example the net was best used against an opponent who used a large shield and wielded a sword, because the shield would build even more of a blind spot then just a helmet and the sword could be taken quickly with the net. Against just a knife fighter, not very effective. The knife fighter had more knives if he lost his first one, and no blind spots use against him.)

    2 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Apachemom's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    36. Apachemom Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 12:58 PM

    I know about Alan Tafoya from the Jicarilla Nation but can you tell us more about "Snake"? He is a trainer for the army? didn't really catch the info....

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • goodrichm21's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    37. goodrichm21 Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 1:06 PM

    i could take out an entire reservation of apaches by myself. those little feather wearing indians aint got shit on me

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Cyborg_Zombie's Profile
    -3 Vote UpVote Down

    38. Cyborg_Zombie Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 2:13 PM

    I really enjoyed this show and even though my money was on the gladiator, the results were still satisfying. I can't wait for the next episode, does anybody know what the next match up is?

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • svenhozz's Profile
    +2 Vote UpVote Down

    39. svenhozz Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 3:36 PM

    Again, Many of you have already stated most of my KuDo's & dissapointments with this show.

    I have one BIG complaint. The Gladiator's Shield. When they were doing the "Distance, Mid-Range, & Close-up"

    Fighting styles, They never ONCE brought in a shield! Then in the final battle.....There is was!

    A Gladiator with a shield, & a Weapon??? Sorry "In'jun" your fighting days are over!

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • RadRad13's Profile
    -3 Vote UpVote Down

    40. RadRad13 Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 3:39 PM

    Oh the outcome made perfect sense to me.



    Given the weapons picked out by the experts, the Gladiator would have been impaled by a dozen arrows, throwing knives and tomahawks before he could get close enough to the Apache. EsPecially considering his exposed torso and legs. Apaches might have no armor, but they had enough sPeed and evasive maneuverability to make up for it.



    The battle reenactment itself was...fanciful. The editing was off (shield on the gladiator's arm, then back, then arm, then back...) and one could write a full blown essay calling BS on every move. But then, it's pretty much a dramatic ploy used for building up susPense to the revelation of the program's results. And it does it's job, although I hope future battles come off as a bit more realistic.



    Next week is Samurai VS Viking.



    I'm rooting for the Viking.

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • svenhozz's Profile
    +1 Vote UpVote Down

    41. svenhozz Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 3:58 PM

    Anyone else watch the Shows on the History Chanel? "Battles BC" & "Warriors"



    AWESOME STUFF!



    Anyone else watch "Sports Science" on FSN?



    "Deadliest Warrior" is like a Mix of the two.



    BUT.......They need to get into the Warrior's Mind-Set.



    If they Do.................Then I'm with RadRad13...............VIKINGS..........Best!!!!

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • Fredro's Profile
    -4 Vote UpVote Down

    42. Fredro Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 4:18 PM

    I agree with the criticisms regarding the simulation, it was ridiculous that the Gladiator didn't finish the Apache off, just stupid and insulting to all Gladiators watching the show. However, I immediately felt that this was done to help all you little "Gladiadies" deal with your disappointment when you found out that 2 times out of 3 the Apache disposes of the big dumb Gladiator. I think it should have been much higher, like 9 times out of 10. First of all, to say that a net and trident could do anything against a knife thrown with such accuracy is again a concession to all you bitches who think you'd be Gladiators in ancient Rome. The Apache has the bow and arrows, as many knives as he can carry, and a few sick ass tomahawks that would obliterate anything the Glady has! And that whole thing about the helmet "breaking" that weapon? One crack with that thing would make a Gladiator see f'ing stars and make his ears ring like a bell, let alone 10 blasts to the dome. Get over it wimps, the Apache is a stealth fighter who has a nimble inside game and a ferocious distance attack, not to mention you'd rarely ever get one alone for a one-on-one, whatever the F that is. I still love the Gladiator, but he should never have been able to pull that arrow through his side in the first place, that's where the simulation really went wrong anyway.

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • czar_jones's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    43. czar_jones Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 4:27 PM

    chuck norris bared hand against anyone and they can have any weapon they choose

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • lunacane's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    44. lunacane Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 4:54 PM

    I really enjoyed the show as well and can not wait for the next match up.. I think to many are putting to much into the "match up" at the end. To me.. it was not one fight.. it was a few of the 1000 senerios they ran. there is no way that the Apache was going to get up after the Gladiator punched him in the face over and over.. but, that section of the scenario ended and it moved on to another "and this is what would have happened if..." Each warrior has their own set of pros and cons.. yes, bows and arrows wouldnt work in the arena, but, out in the open the Apache can hide, ambush, etc. That isnt really the point.. what it boils down to is in 1000 scenerios the Apache came out on top the most..

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • RadRad13's Profile
    +2 Vote UpVote Down

    45. RadRad13 Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 5:31 PM

    svenhozz, betwen this, Battles BC and Dark Dys in Monkey City, a little trend I like to call "THE 300-IZATION OF EDUTAINMENT" seems to be taking over TV. Does David Wenham narrate this show or is it just a sound-alike? Cuz I smirk a little every time he talks.



    This series also reminds me of The Discovery Channel's one season wonder "ANIMAL FACE-OFF" where a CG black bear would fight an alligator and so on. It was edu-taining and all, but I hated how definitive the answers were. "Black Bear wins because we say so." What I love about DW is that you get odds rather than such a clear victory; An Apache has a 66% chance of beating a Gladiator. Groovy.



    If I could offer any constructive criticism here, it would be to not place all the emphasis on weaponry. Things like sPeed, strength, edurance, health would be nice too. For example, the upcoming Pirates VS Knights episode will feature two fighters who were killed by dysentery as much as combat. A funny turnout for that match would be the two of them fighting and the pirate calling a time-out for a bathroom break. Once that's over, the Knight realizes he's got to go and the Pirate kills him on the toilet because he doesn't have the decency to let his opponent finish!

    1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • lol2muchflames's Profile
    0 Vote UpVote Down

    46. lol2muchflames Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 7:32 PM

    For the people who ask why the gladiator stood up after punch number 2 it could be out of force of habit because the gladiator just cant the enemy swiftly there has to be drama otherwise the officials would say thumbs down and that usually meant death for the gladiator



    For the people who say why it was set in a forest first of all it was an OPEN clearing at the beginning and when the Apache guy ran there was only 1 branch that actually affected the fighting and if you say that is cover you are a retard



    For the people who say that the metal sword are better you forgot about the bow which is fast silent deadly and virtually no reload time



    For the people who say the Romans had better bows it didnt really say that the GLADIATORS HAD BOWS



    They also simulated 1000 battles and that match up at the end was probably only like 3 battles



    They should have put them in a forest AND an arena to be fairer though

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • lol2muchflames's Profile
    -3 Vote UpVote Down

    47. lol2muchflames Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 7:34 PM

    For some examples play SPLINTER CELL METAL GEAR SOLID and TENCHU

    Yep forgot about them didnt you

    DIDNT YOU

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • lol2muchflames's Profile
    +1 Vote UpVote Down

    48. lol2muchflames Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 7:45 PM

    Oh and not all gladiators were experienced fighters

    Some were immediately sent in without training if officials felt like it

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • lol2muchflames's Profile
    -2 Vote UpVote Down

    49. lol2muchflames Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 7:48 PM

    You know what?



    We should do some research on these two warriors because all I see are some possible racists posting imflammatory stuff

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

  • lol2muchflames's Profile
    -4 Vote UpVote Down

    50. lol2muchflames Posted on Apr 8 '09 at 7:51 PM

    Oh and most gladiators are under the death sentence so like even if they won they would probably be executed later anyway so like that kind of sucks for the gladiator

    0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

    This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

Saving your comment...

Loading...
Leave a Comment

You must Log-in to leave a comment

You are commenting on: Blood on the Sand: Apache vs Gladiator

Flag this Content as Inappropriate

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this blog are the personal opinions of our bloggers and in no way reflect the opinions of SPIKE, MTV Networks or Viacom.

Warning

Some blogs or websites linked from this site may contain objectionable content. SPIKE is not affiliated with these websites and makes no representations or warranties as to their content.

Likes: 12  

Views: 27,141

Extras

  1. » Ever seen SFW Porn? Now you have! Check out Sasha Grey, Aria Giovanni and more in hilarious episodes of PG Porn.
  2. » Bachelors, do you need simple-to-make recipes? Check out the FOOD DUDE for easy-to-make killer recipes: Food Dude.

» SPIKE.com at a glance

Login

X

Forgot your username or password?

Sign-up


Privacy Policy and Terms of Use

close menu

Copy & paste this code into your blog, MySpace, Friendster or anywhere else you can add HTML.

close form

I would like to flag this content as inappropriate.

close form

I would like to flag this comment as inappropriate.