I have been enjoying a great new show on Spike TV called “Deadliest Warrior” where experts pit historical warriors against each other to determine who would win a fight. If you haven’t seen the show, combinations such as Spartan vs. ninja and pirate vs. knight are played out. Weapons, armor, and tactics are compared and tested scientifically.

At the conclusion of the show, a computer simulation is run to determine which warrior would compare most positively in a real face to face fight.

The show is highly entertaining, and the tests of weaponry and tactics fascinating. For example, tests determined that a Spartan striking someone in the head with his shield can generate 24 Gs - killing most people.  It’s well worth watching.

However, I take a little bit of exception with determining who would win a fight based on any simulation. From an entertainment perspective, I think this is fine.

On the Internet and in magazines the all too familiar argument of who would beat who in a real fight abound. It’s an extension of the same arguments about historical sports teams. I am reminded of a recent discussion on a message board, after the Somali Pirates were killed by Navy SEAL snipers, of whether SEALs were better than historical ninjas.

The truth is that no real answer could ever be derived, no comparison ever really valid, and the arguments for either side are fairly naive. The Spike show does a better job than most Internet arguments. Here are but a few points, each of which calls into question the validity of such comparisons:

• Real fights have context including: reasons for fighting, weather, terrain, time etc. All of these things have significant impact on violent encounters.
• One on one dueling is extremely rare in most cultures. Violent encounters are usually the result of Ambush tactics. The ambushee is at  tactical disadvantage.
• Despite uniformity of training, people are individuals, may be having a bad day, may be under the weather, hungry etc. Individual characteristics have a huge impact on the outcome of violent encounters.
• Dumb random chance is a huge factor in violent encounters.

Someone once asked my Jujutsu teacher what he’d do in a fight against Royce Gracie. his answer, “probably pull out my knife and stab him.” The person was shocked because clearly stabbing is against UFC rules. My teacher’s answer, “I don’t fight people, and don’t compete. If i am in combat with Royce Gracie (or anybody else) it’s because he has threatened my safety or that of my family and I’ll use whatever to defend myself. Since Royce Gracie seems like a nice guy who would never attack me or my family - we’ll never know.”