Okay, a topic that has stirred passionate arguments is the infamous "Knights Vs Samurai" Debate. First i'm going to tell you why it's silly to argue about this, then I am going to do it anyway. These are very different warriors, with different fighting styles, different religious beliefs, different ways of life and VERY different time periods (Knights came early, around the 8th to 10th century). Anyway, on to the post! lets look at arms and armor: Knights and Samurai had a variety of weapons to choose from. European Knights had a larger variety of weapons than the Samurai; These included One-handed swords, Longswords, Falchions, axes, daggers, spears, lances, bill-hooks, halberds, maces war-hammers and many other forms of side-arms and pole arms. Japanese Samurai had a smaller range of weapons as opposed to the Knight, but the basic concept is the same. They had their well-known Katana, including uchigatana, Tachi, Wakizashi, tanto, Yumi (bow), Naginata and Tari. Weapons on both sides where used to great effect, pole-weapons like the Japanese Naginata or the European pole-axe. Armor was common in both fields. Knights typically wore A few layers in varying protection, first would be a padded Gambeson Jacket, often a chain-mail (Maille) was worn over the gambeson and supported by a leather belt to take weight of the shoulders. This would render the mail shirt almost weightless and feel like a metal T-shirt. Then a fairly thick layer of hardened steel plates were worn over the top, this was known as Plate Armor. Despite popular belief, properly fitted Plate Armor barely hindered movement and made fighting far easier, you would feel the additional weight so staying in good shape is a must. Samurai wore Lamellar armor known as Yoroi. This armor was made from individual scales often made from Iron or leather (Yes, Samurai wore metal in their armor, this would have the same problem as European plate, stay fit, fool!). Many Samurai warriors had chain-mail protecting their arms, but was of a different make and craftsmanship that European mail, still a lot of hard work and a lot of hours to make it. Fighting styles: Both Knights and Samurai were skilled warriors, Samurai are often depicted as being of superior skill, but that is just nonsense, both were skill and graceful warriors. Samurai had their own fighting style, I'm not an expert as I have only trained in HEMA and a small amount of Karate. Maybe this will help: http://www.ehow.com/list_5978856_eight-sword-fighting-styles-samurai.html I practice HEMA, which is Historical European Martial Arts. Many of the schools favour techniques from various countries, I train in formal German Martial arts, this includes wrestling, but it's even cooler, because we get to do it with swords . We use various weapons, mostly long-swords, arming swords, and the occasional side-sword. Bucklers are also a common element in European sword fighting, we use it on conjunction with a one-handed "arming" sword, bucklers are basically small metal shields used as a carry piece. What if they fought each-other? This is the meat-and-bone of the flame war, the imaginary scenario of a Knight somehow meeting a Samurai and the two for some reason, fight one another, lets analyse this. First of all, Knights and Samurai never met, both never explored far enough to come across one another, even when the Europeans discovered Japan and the Samurai warrior race, Knights had already died out and gunpowder, pikes and great-swords dominated the battlefield. Samurai died out as the elite warrior in Japanese military when guns and cannons where introduced, they slowly died out and eventually the Samurai were dumped from the military, as guns dominated an metal and leather armoured man with a sword on a horse, this is exactly what happened with the Knights. Plate armour was worn, even when guns started to dominate, but as technology became more advanced, plate armour became useless and bullets went straight through it. But what if the miraculously met each-other? How would the Samurai reacted to a skilled fighting covered head to toe in steel? How would the knight react to the detailed and beautiful Samurai armour and his sword? We will never know. The samurai's sword had the advantage of been able to kill a man on the draw, mostly in an upwards direction across the body, this would be ineffective against a plate armoured knight, as the sword would glance off and barely scratch the armour. This is one HUGE disadvantage the Samurai has, he cannot cut or stab through the plate armour of the knight, it's just not possible. Plate armour is fairly think, hardened polished steel, most of the components are rounded in shape and polished to a reflective glow, meaning edge weapons would do absolutely nothing to an armoured knight. Some Japanese fighting sources depict something very prominent in European martial arts, the technique of half-swording. Half-swording is where you grab the blade of the sword with your off hand (Hand opposite to your dominant hand) and use it to thrust, this reduces the flex of the blade whilst giving you more accuracy over the point of the blade, turning into a spear/sword style hybrid. A Knight fighting another Knight would use these techniques to thrust the point of their sword into the gaps of the armour effectively, these gaps include the area near the shoulder, the armpit, the bend of the elbow, behind the knee, under the helmet, in the visor and in the groin area. If you research images from the work of Hans Talhoffer, you will see various half-swording techniques, the may look rather silly at first, but against an armoured knight, the worked like a charm. Of course a Samurai will target the weak points of the armour, these weak points are hard to target effective as the Knight wouldn't be very happy if you tried to stab a sword into his weak points. Samurai has many components to it, making it have far more weak spots for the knight to attack, of course the Samurai will make sure he defends these weak spots. The samurai's skill with the bow is also rather useless, as their bows were lower poundage that English longbows as they had to be able to fire them from horseback, these bows would do nothing to an armoured knight unless you hit the sweet spots in his armour as mentioned earlier. It’s rather hard to determine the outcome of the fight, since we have no idea who the warriors would react to one another. While a Knight may get tired more quickly as opposed to a Samurai, Samurai still have to deal with the heavy iron plates which have the same effect as steel plate. If you go on you-tube and search "Armoured knight fights" or "Knights vs Samurai", you will see some very appalling examples of fighting, most a program known as "Battle of the nations" and M1 "Knight" fights. In these videos you will see grown men in full armour in brutal and exciting to watch battle. While fun to watch, they all just mindlessly bash each-other with their swords, which is useless and silly. Swords do not create enough blunt force trauma to be able to cause damage to a man in armour using edge blows. If you wanna bash a guy senseless in full armour, use a mace or war-hammer. So who is the better warrior? Answer: It depends! There is no other way to answer this question, other than situation and context. Both warriors were supposed to be high-ranking, intelligent and skilled in combat. Let's say they do fight each-other, the Samurai could be an awesome warrior while the knights is fairly moderate, the Samurai has a higher change of winning that fight; But if we swapped them out for two different fighters we would get a different result. Samurai may win depending on his skill level, knight may win depending on his skill level. So it will vary depending on each individual warrior. Feel free to comment on anything regarding this and please share the knowledge you have, regardless whether or not that knowledge is relevant. Thanks!