Samurais of course. Simply because knights had swords so big that they had to be carried with 2 hands, and the long part wasn't really sharp. They were more like big clubs with pointy ends. A samurai's sword is made to not only impale, but also to slice and dice. Plus Bushido >>Chivalry.
I'd say Knight, disciplined and if the King's retinue. If not, the samurai, they can move quicker and their sword can be swung faster, but one blow with a double edged sword and they're screwed.
Hahahahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahahaahhahaha. Sorry for spamming. But, Million Knivez, please research before speaking. The Samurai's are not only known for their fastness, skills and high quality swords. But also for their skills with other things, for eksampel a bow. Or a wand for that sake. Am just so freaked out, that you can't belive it. I just wan't to call you, here from Denmark to say that you are SO wrong. Heh, but anyway, Samurai will own the knight. Christian.
Armoured: Knight would win. Their broadswords could hack through armour; katana couldn't cut through steel. Unarmoured: Have to give it to the samurai, knight is too slow. Unless the knight had a rapier, then it'd be a close fight.
Samurai. He/She'd be faster than the knight. =P Only disadvantage the knight'd have would be that he's really slow.
i think the Samurai would win. Quicker and more agile that a clunky knight in armor. also a samurai is very diciplined and devotes their life to the way of the sword. sure the knight has armor, but almost any sword at an angle of 0 degrees driven into an armor in that time would definatly pierce right through. katanas are dangerously sharp and regarded as one of the most dangereous swords, and is one of the samurai's favorite. this upcommng comment is going to be stupid in the knights favor, but the depth of technique with a sword also goes to the samurai.
The samurai would totally own the knight. A knight's armor has several weak spots, like the neck and arm pits. It wouldn't be hard for a samurai to hit those spots.
Are you guys retarded? Their are so many types of knights and so many types of samurai each with their own advantages and disadventages. If you take the templars they kicked asses back in the 11th-13th century. They where [just like samurais] Highly devoted to their skills and whould traind [and pray to god] everyday. They where strong as hell and could take massive hits and would still keep on fighting, but their where not all heavy tanks some prefered knives poles or bows, and for the armor cloth/leather or plate. It all depends on the situation and the type of samurai/knight who are fighting. You cant just say samurai>knight thats utterly bull----! Guys get your facts right, please!
