Deadliest Warrior The Aftermath - William Wallace vs. Shaka Zulu

Newest first Oldest first Comments (155)

• 
  0

  1. knightlee Posted on Jan 10 '10 at 6:55 PM

  IN Shaka zulu vs William wallace two grate commanders from history, you guys should have done 5 on 5 squads that way the tactics of each warrior could be shown. I think if it was 5 on 5 Shaka zulus men would have a better chance because of the speed they could flank Wallaces men.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  2. lastrebeltnt Posted on Dec 16 '09 at 7:30 PM

  I come from Scottish decent, and I have more traits from that line of my family then any other.....I have already been givin stuff my great great grand father made when he was becoming a US citizen....Scary enough shortly after seeing this episode I curiosly looked up scetches of William Wallace on google, and I wasn't he only one who saw a reasemblince in more then one(I know my spelling is most triumphet for Bill and Ted)......I've never been more interested in my Scottish line and am pissed I have no way to confirm weather or not I'm a decendent......Though I doubt it, it stilll would be awsome to do some reaserch to trace my family back to the same age if possible........P.S. did William Wallace have children.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  3. amelia.cecilia Posted on Dec 2 '09 at 6:54 PM

  Did it bug any of you that these experts based their "history" of William Wallace of of Mel Gibsons film? It's one of the most historically inaccurate films of all time. We don't know if he had a wife and no effing blue pain!

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  4. RunnerM4 Posted on Sep 7 '09 at 1:35 PM

  I don't care what anybody else says. William Wallace won fair + square. If you guys can't take that, we'll go to hell.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  5. XtremeWarrior Posted on Jul 17 '09 at 12:49 PM

  lets see Okinawan vs Macedonians, or concestadores vs crusaders

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  +1

  6. Lions_Den Posted on Jul 17 '09 at 8:28 AM

  Well this went as expected. I was rooting for William and given the advantage in weaponry, it was not hard to predict this outcome. I hope to see Shaka back though. He's a real warrior through and through. I'd like to see him rumble with a Viking or even a particular Viking like Eric the Red. Great show and let's see season 2

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  7. deadliestwarriorfan223 Posted on Jul 15 '09 at 1:17 PM

  hey max i have one question for you and this is off topic but can you mod games? plus MAKE ANOTHER SEASON!!! this is like my favorite show and i dont want it to stop!

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  8. orxbox Posted on Jul 9 '09 at 1:23 AM

  one problem i had with this fight was this, the real fight was about 40 seconds long, at about 35 seconds into the fight shaka zulu gets hamstrung (a blow to the back on the leg, cutting tendons and basically immobilising the hamstringee, he COULD NOT have been jumping around like he was, you cant reproduce pain in tese scenarios, and that is why they are inaccurate

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  9. Goblintrain Posted on Jun 22 '09 at 1:59 PM

  A show i would reccommend to any one interested in the topic of the Zulu is "Warriors" with Terry Schappert. He does an excellent job of letting the living culture of the Zulu themselves explain their warfare. It is a rare insight. The Zulu are some damn scary people! I don't want to go too far into this one though because I just don't have possession of enough facts about the Zulu to present a good discussion. The few sources that were contemporary with Shaka seem to be regarded as inconsistent & unreliable in their observations. It leaves me sitting here on this chair, a white American male that knows that any comments he makes about the Zulu warrior will most likely be denigrated as either "stereotype" or even blatant "rcism".

  1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  10. shakaboy Posted on Jun 21 '09 at 9:19 AM

  DID YOU KNOW THERE WAS A SCOTTISH ZULU CHIEF?
  
  It's a long story but a true one - in 1858 a white guy was made into a full Zulu Chief. You can read about it online in my book WHITE SHAKA BOY http://www.whiteshaka.com
  
  As for Shaka - it is really important to know that he is famous in Africa for inventing a new kind of short, stabbing spear - an "assegai" or, as he called it the "iklwa" from the sound it made when it entered the heart - which fundamentally changed Southern African warfare.
  
  Instead of throwing spears, Shaka developed a new, high-contact method of warfare which gave him a devastating advantage over rival tribes in a large area of Southeastern Africa.
  
  Using a new full-body shield, his troops were taught to rush their opponents under this cover. Then, with a special technique, they would pull away their enemies' shields and expose their opponents' underarms though which they could pierce their hearts with a deep thrusting stab.
  
  When organized into units called "impis" and deployed with decoy strategies and great enveloping formations, their enemies were rendered powerless. This is how the Zulus under Shaka became arguably, the most powerful tribe in Africa.
  
  My online book "White Shaka Boy" - is based on the true story of a Scotsman (NOT Wallace, OK, but John Dunn) who became a full Zulu chief with 49 wives and left behind 119 biracial descendants - one of whom is an unsuspecting New Yorker. It comes with hip Zulu music and a lot of cool historical and contemporary insight on the Zulus. www.whiteshaka.com

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  -2

  11. knight560 Posted on Jun 15 '09 at 8:53 AM

  shaka zulu sucks pants

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  -2

  12. Swansong6 Posted on Jun 12 '09 at 1:25 PM

  cont.
  You see, you need this bias and strength in conviction or you end up being like politicians or bad Generals who are disconnected from the reality of warfare. It is good and well to say from our information this would be the outcome but when you can¿t even get straight how a weapon is used and although I am keying in on one of your shows this can be applied to all of your shows w/ regards to weapon function and usage. But that is not how it goes lets face it William Wallace w/ his Claymore alone would have decimated Shaka Zulu and even Shaka Zula wouldn¿t have been daft enough to hurl a weapon back that is meant to swing around and hit your enemy common sense mind you even he would figured this one out straight away. Or his comrade would pick it up and take out the legs of many. Whoever gave you this information about hurling this or however you extrapolated this from the historical archives got it wrong. The only way William Wallace lets go of this weapon is if he was fleeing the battlefield in full retreat hoping he would knock a guy out. It was painful to watch this guy under hand this at a block of ice let me reiterate "PAINFUL" to watch and then ever more "PAINFUL" to listen to you go on about it's ineffectiveness as a long range weapon! lol Come along common sense should have told you these where swung like Bezerkers and I tell you put that in the hand of a capable Scot of 6'5 plus and swinging this 25 -40 Lb. ball of steal and he would dispatch at least a dozen shaka khan shaka khan. You did get the Claymore right they were used during this time. So where the morning stars used and the ball and chain! If you would like I can make sure your application of the weapon you are using
  are being used as they are intended or how they would be in combat!

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  -1

  13. Swansong6 Posted on Jun 12 '09 at 1:25 PM

  cont.
  I understand these are computer simulations but the reality is in order to get it right if you take away the bias you take away any chance of the computer getting it right. Remember a computer only gives out what you put in. And it doesn¿t compute heart or common sense. Remember this or add this to your algorithm you understand this is how so many battles have been lost throughout history, politicians thinking this is how a weapon should act or react thus you have the outcome you desire and this never happens. You need a perspective or vantage point if you will that affords a bit of latitude.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  -1

  14. Swansong6 Posted on Jun 12 '09 at 1:23 PM

  Ok the William Wallace Heavy Ball on a chain. Number one they wouldn't throw it like the Shaka Zula threw a spear they swung it like a morning star and wreaked Havoc on their enemies the only way they let go of that is if they got tired or their arm was wound or worse. That display of him aiming the ball and chain and handing over your weapon when you missed was ridiculous, you should really use a weapon how it was intended to be used. You don't throw your weapon to the enemy hoping you will hit him! That weapon was made to be swung and crush as many enemies as you could in hand to hand combat that is why there is a handle. A morning star was wielded under the same principle you swung it and wrought havoc, you most certainly didn¿t throw your weapon in hope you would hit a mobile target thence disarming yourself and giving your weapon away to the enemy.
  
  I am unsure how intellectually sound William Wallace or Shaka Zula were but even they would have gotten this challenge right. I don¿t know where you get your information from or where your research is conducted? You really need an historian like me. I mean really there have been several challenges where you¿ve completely missed the mark and it affects the outcome. You see, your ardent zeal is noble but your need to try and be ¿polictally correct¿ actually clouds your judgment more than if you were honest and a bit biased. You end up conducting battles devoid of logic and this sadly gives you a low battlefield IQ. You are essentially doing historically what all warriors despised you are conducting battles as a politician would, from afar in hope you¿ve gotten it right. In spite of your intentions you end up missing the mark however well your intentions are. You need a bit of bias this affords common sense.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  -1

  15. tmwtgp Posted on Jun 10 '09 at 9:06 AM

  I love all the history i get from watching the show. learning about the weapons and seeing there destructive capabilities. with all that said, i have to admit that the show should be called MOST DEFENSIVE WARRIOR. the show is bases on how much damage a "warrior" can take while standing in 1 place. at no point does this show care about TACTICS, MANUVERABILITY, ATTACKS, or SKILL. it is very easy to tell that the cast and collective have never been in REAL confrontations.... or fake ones. lol
  
  we have CLAYMORES. i wouldn't be dumb enough to use it against a skilled person wielding an african short spear unless the guy couldn't walk. anytime we are in a situation where 1 person has a large slicing weapon against a lighter stabbing weapon we need to make STUPID RULES so as to even things out for the larger weapon. otherwise it's over too quickly.
  
  i would like to see a 2nd season to learn more but we need more people like Chuck Lidel on the show. i loved his comment when he said something about just hitting the opponents arm. that's a real fighter. realisticly the NINJA, SHAKA, and MONK would lead the score boards with stiff comp from apache and maori. get some people on the show to SPAR with these tools. i'll do it. i'll fight everyone just using a light saber fencing style. stab to the molliwhoppin stab!
  
  
  
  in the show's deffense: the cpu can crunch numbers but can't call bull.....

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  16. southside29 Posted on Jun 8 '09 at 10:57 PM

  Wallace was a lowlander and a noble, not some woad-painted Celtic warrior from Roman era Britian. He would probably have been decked out in typical Knight gear of the time; mail and a great helm and a large shield. No plaid, no blue face. It seems the show was more concerned with portraying the fictional Wallace of the recent movie than the historical one.
  
  
  
  And his mail would've been the RIVETED kind, not the unriveted kind that failed to stand up to the ikwah.

  1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  17. Route666 Posted on Jun 7 '09 at 1:08 AM

  Does this Aftermath take into account the fact that William Wallace is Doom guy? He's carrying 20-30 pounds of armor, a 15 pound ball and chain, a five pound claymore, a shield, a dirk, and a ten pound warhammer. Shaka Zulu's weaponry was easily carried by one person, however Wallace was dragging a radio flyer wagon behind him to hold all of his gear. Wallace's weapons were a combination of multiple pieces of Scottish warriors. Infantry, pikemen, and heavy soldiers.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  +1

  18. darenclay Posted on Jun 6 '09 at 8:58 PM

  William Wallace tried to do what Shaka Zulu did...form his peole into a nation. Shaka did it while he was alive an Wallace's people did it after he was captured and killed. Wallace couldnt have defeated Shaka because first off thier mentalitys were different. Wallace's fury came from his anger of England an from those who oppresed his people,Shaka's fury came from his thirst for power and control. So Wallace was only a beast when he was pushed to his limit so he was not a natural killer. Shaka's firceness on the other hand was part of who he was. His ambition an ruthlessness needed no kick start. Also Shaka was a great Military Stategist. Alot Of his Manuevrs are still used today like 'the bull'. So to say a man like Shaka who was quicker more focused and was more military inclined would lose to Wallace just because he had big sword is ridiculous. You cant count out warriors mind any more than you can count out his skill. An even though they both had strong wills Experince and adaptibility will trump will. Shaka had more military skill than Wallace,Fought more batlles than Wallace, An even conquered more than Wallace. So even though they would both be ready Wallace would be charging in blindly and Shaka would be comming in with a plan of attack an experience.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  19. JoeyDaMik Posted on Jun 6 '09 at 8:14 PM

  So I'm watching this IRA vs Taliban thing, it's incredible to think that the Taliban would have a chance against the IRA. The IRA is typically composed of a group of people born into "The Cause", where the Taliban (who I have personally fought against) are typically composed of a group of people forced into service or recruited by religious leaders who are paid to tell the uneducated masses of nomadic people into service because "Allah" told them to serve. Most shoot from the hip with a spray and pray mentality where the IRA were typically going to shoot from the hide in a sniper or guerilla tactic, following the ambush or explosion. The Taliban's IED is done to terrorize, and instill fear. they are done for a show, often filmed and aired on the various "news" shows in the middle east, and te internet. IRA bombings were specifically targeted and done for purpose not for show.
  I think before this fight ever started it was decided in the basis of the cause, the IRA fighting for themselves and their heritage, the Taliban fighting because some one told them to.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  20. n0s41 Posted on Jun 5 '09 at 10:59 PM

  Bruce Lee needs to enter the dojo against like Chuck Norris or somethin

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  21. bigdummy23 Posted on Jun 5 '09 at 1:14 PM

  There were serious problems with this episode. First and foremost, the knight advocates were not using Historical European Martial Arts techniques. There are dozens of groups in Europe and the US now who do the real thing based on the period fighting manuals. I think your audience would find the real thing interesting. Recommend the film Reclaiming the Blade for anyone curious about this revival.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  22. bigdummy23 Posted on Jun 5 '09 at 1:04 PM

  just FYI, when they showed the mail being pierced in the Shaka Zulu vs. William Wallace episode, they for some reason decided to use "non riveted" mail. That only exists in Ren Faires, medieval armor was riveted amigos, check the wiki or crack a book. Mail used in period going back to the Celts and the Romans was always riveted. Butted mail isn't functional as armor. Probably more important, the gambeson worn underneath. Ten to fifteen layers of linen have been proven to be prety effective at stopping arrows, etc. in numerous modern tests, you can see the images and video online.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  23. Totems Posted on Jun 4 '09 at 8:22 PM

  I hope there is going to be 2nd season. I would love to see the winners go againest winners from first season.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  24. jonathonnohtanoj Posted on Jun 4 '09 at 5:32 PM

  All right. Awesome show. There is one problem. On the computer simulations, you test 1000 battles, which is a good idea. The thing you don't do is measure accuracy,power,force,perception,ect. This kind of stuff changes with every warrior. You only measure one or two people's power and stuff. And guns may misfire.That means in any fight with a gun, the results may change in real life. You shouldn't use guns.This goes for all the shows you do.Besides Apachi,Gladiator,Samuri,Viking,Ninja,Spartan,Pirate,Knight,Mafia,Yakuza,Green Beret,Shaolin Monk,Maori,Taliban,and IRA, you should do Eskimos, Navy, Crazy Horse, Hung-Wu, Natzis, and Moctezuma.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  25. DexterGrif Posted on Jun 3 '09 at 4:15 PM

  will there be as eason two??
  
  heres some ideas for season 2:
  
  red army (ww2) vs us marine (ww2)
  
  viet cong vs Australian SAS
  
  delta Force s SAS
  
  Alexander the Great vs Hannibal
  
  The Immortals vs Aztecs
  
  American Cowboy vs Chineese Triad
  
  Herman Cortes vs Attial the Hun
  
  Roman Legionaire vs Egyptian
  
  Carthaginian vs Mongol
  
  Aztec vs. Austrailian Aborigine
  
  Chindits bs Werchmats
  
  Jannisary vs Cossack
  
  AND MORE :)
  
  msg me if you want more ideas

  1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  26. kykifox Posted on Jun 3 '09 at 2:05 PM

  i would like to see a egyptain vs a semiri

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  27. Scottish_MacNeil Posted on Jun 3 '09 at 12:01 PM

  man,I really dont think that Shaka was cheated at all, but one thing i will comment on is that william Wallaces Claymore was actually 6.5 feet not 4.5 like what they said one the show. A regular claymore would be 4.5 feet but William Wallce used his Claymore at 6 feet so if they had have used a 6 foot long Claymore i would think it would have been more of a advantage for Wallace.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  28. IRA505 Posted on Jun 3 '09 at 9:08 AM

  if they run out of warriors they should use video game charcters like master chief.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  29. nzephier Posted on Jun 3 '09 at 6:54 AM

  will there be a 2nd season? if so then can we get a sneak peek at the warriors who might win?
  
  btw i think this fight was totally wrong. mostly because Shaka Zulu would not waste his poison spit, by just spitting it and hoping it hit. i am sure that warriors of Shaka's and even William Wallace's caliber would time their poison spit, and use it when they saw the opportune time.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  30. IRA505 Posted on Jun 3 '09 at 6:01 AM

  why is the dude always wereing a SKIRT!!!!!! ok..... he lived in scotland.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  31. DustinCartwright Posted on Jun 3 '09 at 1:11 AM

  Very nice, I've been watching this show since the first Gladiator vs. Apache episode, and I've enjoyed every simulation conducted so far,
  
  
  
  In this simulation, I especially liked instead of pitting warrior groups together, you have two war heroes fight instead, adds a certain epic feel to the whole thing
  
  
  
  The simulation program you use might make a very innovative gaming engine, just a thought and suggestion for the developers of the application. In fact, I can invision a creative video game based of this show's concept
  
  
  
  Keep running this show as long as you can, it's given me reason to even turn on the T.V. anymore :D
  
  There is a whole world full of warriors after all, and a world full of conflict

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  32. optimusprimerib Posted on Jun 2 '09 at 9:11 PM

  Shaka would have definitely won. The Zulu had a very unorthodox and mobile style style that Wallace would never have unexpected. Yes Wallace's weapon were one shot one kill but they left him wide open for some one who, like Shaka attacks very fast and multiple times. Wallace's weapons look like they just do your usual horizontal and vertical slash but Zulu weapons would cut at any angle . Besides Wallace was captured Shaka had himself executed purposely destroyed so only Shaka had the power to kill himself.

  1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  33. TheAlbino1 Posted on Jun 2 '09 at 7:59 PM

  in ultimate satisfaction a song by ludicrous he brought a knife to a gun fight and won so its possible to win with a knife so that should be taken into account

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  34. Hack-and-Slash Posted on Jun 2 '09 at 6:38 PM

  Has there been a show on the Huns? That would be cool! But who would you match them with?

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  35. kchotrod Posted on Jun 2 '09 at 6:32 PM

  Chill guys. They run the simulation 1,000 times. This to me is the best episode. I hope there is a season 2. The worst is Ninja vs Spartan. These 2 warriors arent even close. Pirate vs Knight? What was that? I think Knight vs Spartan would have been better.
  
  I think they should take 2 similar warriors and match them. Zulu vs Maori would have been good. Shaolin vs Samurai would have been good also. Surely there will be a season 2.

  1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  36. TheAlbino1 Posted on Jun 2 '09 at 6:27 PM

  The only one ive actually been angry about is the gladiator versus apache because you tested the scissor but didnt use it. Also in the pirate versus knight i feel the knight was outmatched even though he had armor because the pirate still had guns even though the knight did beast he should have won. The one question i have though for the IRA is why did you choose the sling over say a knife because the sling wasn't all the effective in my opinion?

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  37. diaper_wrath Posted on Jun 2 '09 at 11:09 AM

  will there ever be somewhat of a royal rumble where all of the warriors fight in a single battle

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  38. Rakaru Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 10:23 PM

  Hey, you have to tell me HOW CAN YOU THINK PREDATOR KILL ALIENS!?!?!?! Thats just stupid!!!! please answer this please i need to know i NEED to know!!

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  39. bige2585 Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 10:17 PM

  I think that Wallce and Shaka would not have fought each other because they both had one common enemy it was the english and if they fought they would fought the english sided by side and they would have taken apart the English army.

  1 reply Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  40. MarioItali85 Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 9:40 PM

  I think that William Wallace won fair and square. He was just a better warrior than Shaka zulu. Shaka Zulu was deadly, but not the deadliest warrior.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  41. tmwtgp Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 7:58 PM

  1 thing i've noticed about this show is that it should be called the Most Defensive Warrior because it bases everything on how much damage 1 can take standing still while someone hits him with a weapon. nothing is based on attacks or manuverabilty or skill.
  
  still i love learning about all the tools the warriors used but once the comments start i have to mute my TV. it's kinda sad that every show ends in a tie right b4 the battle too. it's almost like the people on the show have never ever been in a real (or fake) fight.
  
  i have a claymore and i wouldn't be dumb enough to use it against a guy with a short african spear unless the guy couldn't walk. a large slicing weapon will always lose to a lighter stabbing weapon in a REAL FIGHT. it's frustrating when you spar against someone who just keeps stabbing you. but that shit works! so we either make up stupid rules or just not allow large swords vs light swords.
  
  the history makes the show very fun to watch though. Shaka, apache, and ninja would rule this show in reality.
  
  and in the show's defense: a computer can only crunch numbers and not skill. And it can't call bullshit!

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  42. spartanfan16 Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 6:41 PM

  WHY ISN'T THERE GOING TO BE A SEASON 2 ?!?!?!?!?!?! ='(
  ='(
  ='(
  ='(

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  43. ojortiz Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 4:25 PM

  put your finger on your nose 2. hold your breath for 5 seconds 3. say the name of your love 4. that person will ask you out on the next Friday 5. you will have the best day tomorrow 6. if you don't copy and paste to 2 other sites comment taker you will have bad luck and die in 2 days. have a nice day

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  44. Collins36 Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 3:52 PM

  i think yall should do some warriors like...swat vs someone and bruse lee vs someone and shaka zulu vs someone without armer...

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  45. orgasmicham Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 3:40 PM

  man there should be a conquistador vs like mongol or aztec

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  46. fredjoe Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 2:40 PM

  Nice Kilt dude

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  +1

  47. LoupGarou216 Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 12:00 PM

  Wallace did not use a Claymore. Period.
  
  The so called "Wallace Sword" is a fake and didn't appear in historical records until centuries after Wallace's death and is a style of sword that did not exist in the 1290's. Claymores were used centuries after Wallace and the Wallace Sword was made centuries after Wallace's death.
  
  The historical ignorance found in Deadliest Warrior is absolutely staggering.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  48. TheBigBeefy Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 11:34 AM

  I just watched Pirate Vs Knight and I have to say that it's not fair how the Pirate won. If lifting the Knight's helmet and giving him a headshot is fair, the Knight should have impaled him with his sword instead of riding on that horse for most of the fight.

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  49. Ragesanity Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 8:02 AM

  I have an excellent idea for a Deadliest Warrior episode: a modern day, special forces soldier vs 10, 000 Roman legionaires, or 10, 000 Greek hoplites or Samurai, or Crusaders or any of pre-modern history's greatest soldiers.
  
  
  
  I would choose a 21st century spec ops soldier as opposed to conventional because quite simply, the former is the best soldier in any Western military. The question in this contest would be how many out of his 10,000 opponents would our modern day warrior be able to slaughter before he's forced to retire or is overwhelmed?
  
  
  
  The lethal panoply of assault and crew served small arms, portable rocket launchers, grenades and explosives would make 21st century operator a walking arsenol. Compound his firepower with exceptional expertise in the handling of his weapons, and our soldier would be virtually unstoppable.
  
  
  
  My money is on the spec ops soldier killing the vast majority of his pre-modern opposition.
  
  
  
  To the creators of Dealiest Warrior, let's do this thing!!

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

• 
  0

  50. Goblintrain Posted on Jun 1 '09 at 6:54 AM

  Did IRA vs Taliban already air? I was expecting it Tuesday? lol

  0 replies Reply Flag comment as inappropriate

  This comment has been buried by our users. Reveal Comment

Saving your comment...

Leave a Comment

You must Log-in to leave a comment

You are commenting on: The Aftermath - William Wallace vs. Shaka Zulu

Flag this Content as Inappropriate