This was an unlikely interpolation (400 pound people would be much likely fats than power giants), that’s why I put smile after that
Not sure what is logical fallacy mentioned here though. The statistic of “martial art vs. bear” was not proven, of course, however, my belief that any animal wouldn’t have a chance against “martial art master”, is based on similar (a=b, b=c => a=c) real-life accounts of masters against large groups of warriors (Myamoto Musashi), the charging bull (Oyama) or tiger (e.g. Kiomasa, Katō Kiyomasa - Wikipedia). I think there won’t be actual fight in most of such cases though, as bear would feel swordsman’s Ki and wouldn’t charge on the calm, strong blob of energy without direct provocation (and masters won’t step into bear Ki zone either).
This. Not sure where this idea that the katana was the king of the battlefield comes from, but it’s bullshit. Not to say the katana (one made by a master) isn’t a really clever piece of technology because it is, but it’s not some sort of magical killing machine. Hell, the samurai used it mainly as a symbol of their status, not a first line battlefield weapon.
That said, and getting the meat of the OP…is the samurai in full armor (and what period are we talking about here)? Mounted on horseback? Does he have a yumi? Or is this a samurai wearing hakama, perhaps out for a stroll in Alaska with only his trusty katana and wakizashi at his side? I think that, maybe, a fully armored samurai could take down a kodiak with some luck and perhaps not die. It would require some sort of crippling blow that allowed the samurai time to put distance between him and the bear while the bear bleeds out.
A samurai mounted on horseback with his primary weapon and his primary backup (neither of which was the katana) I think would have less of an issue unless the bear surprised him or it was really close quarters.
This match is a bit more realistic than a lot of the hypothetical match-ups. I’d give the swordsman a chance. I’ll assume he’s not just skilled with a sword but actually combat hardened so he doesn’t shit himself as soon as the bear charges. If he’s nimble enough to dodge and take some slices out of the bear, and keep dodging by making quick lateral moves, still jabbing and slicing, he’s got a long shot at outlasting the bear until he can cripple him and drive the sword into him.
But it’s just a chance, guys with guns have lost to the bear. I’ll bet on the bear unless the odds give me a big payoff for the sword fighter.
So, forgive my ignorance here: would the armor really help? I’m thinking that if the Kodiak makes a hit, the armor is going to be slightly better than wet cardboard under the blow. Whatever advantages the Kodiak has, surely its “one hit one kill” policy is going to be near the top: the strength and sheer inertia of its blows will win. Will the armor maybe provide important protection against a glancing blow? I’m not trying to score rhetorical points, I’m genuinely curious.
Because the other effect I’d expect from the armor would be that it’d slow the samurai down, and what the samurai may be able to do is to move quickly and in an unexpected fashion: the samurai’s intelligence is going to be his main advantage. Knowing about the “charging” bear’s inertia, knowing where it’ll expect him to be, and not being in that spot at a critical moment, is gonna be the samurai’s best hope. That’s gonna require a helluva lot of speed, and armor will presumably cut down on speed.
I also think insufficient attention may be given to the “charging” part of the description. Matadors make good use of the bull’s inertia to sidestep the charge. Is the charge of a bear sufficiently different from the charge of a bull that there’d be no chance of sidestepping? Again, I don’t pretend any knowledge at all, I’m Just Asking Questions.
Finally, I think the question is made most interesting by slightly reformulating it: stipulating that the samurai has very little chance of killing the charging bear, what should the samurai armed only with a katana do to maximize his chances of killing it and living to tell the tale? Armor or no armor? Head strike or neck strike or paw strike? If he’s not going to submit to being bear kibble, what should he try?
It would depend on the situation as well as what era we are talking about our perspective samurai comes from. But in general the armor is going to be more than slightly better than wet cardboard, regardless. Let’s go over some examples. Say our samurai is surprised by a charging bear and has no time to do anything. To paraphrase from Karate Kid, squish like grape. In this case the armor is probably not going to do much more than keep him alive for a few extra seconds at best. But lets say the samurai sees the bear charging and is able to use terrain obstacles to hamper the bear. Well, the armor might prove useful in deflecting claws while the samurai uses the sword to inflict wounds either painful or debilitating. If a claw would have opened up your chest is deflected by the armor enough so you only get a bruise then it was helpful, no?
That’s the thing with these kinds of questions. It depends on the exact circumstances. If there is a big rock for the samurai to get on top of and swing down on the bear then he has a chance…and the armor might help. On flat, open ground with the bear charging and no where to run or hide? Well, probably not, though if he has time he might be able to swipe at the bears nose, inflicting a very painful cut and maybe getting lucky and taking out an eye, perhaps rolling aside at the last second and only taking a swipe or two from the claws…in which case the armor might, again, help. Or the bear might charge and stomp the samurai flat, in which case…squish like grape.
Again, it depends on the situation. But I think the small amount of speed you’d get wouldn’t be worth the cost in armored protection. Me, I’d rather have the armor as I think that’s going to offer someone their best (small) chance of living through the encounter.
Actually, he should climb a tree or large rock if he has the time. If he doesn’t, I’d personally go for the face and try and time my strike and roll for the possibility that the bear is going to run up then get on two legs and display. If you are able to strike the face you might get lucky, hitting the nose and maybe eyes and you might be quick and lucky enough to roll away before you get clawed and then use the distraction and pain of your strike to get away or use terrain. If the bear basically charges you fully, you are probably screwed, so go down fighting.
My gut impression (this being IMHO and all) is that the samurai is a dead man if he stands his ground. This isn’t a bullfight; for all their power, bulls are a prey species.
Based on an encounter in 1999, the best bet would be to slash the bear and try to escape. If the samurai hangs in there and makes it a fight to the finish, I can’t see that ending well.
The Slingshot Channel guy on YouTube has compared an home made “ork sword” with the famed katana: Katana Mythbusting Extreme - YouTube. It’s not a scientific comparison of course, but fun an informative.
Man this one just keeps trudging on, doesn’t it :p.
Nope. Worse color discrimination than you( decent at blues, bad at red-orange ), better low-light vision than you( like a lot of mammals they have a tapetum lucidum ), roughly equivalent acuity. All the all their vision is pretty decent - on average about as good as the generic human. It’s just that they rely more heavily on senses like scent.
Wouldn’t put money on that. Folks seem to assume that humans somehow are more agile than grizzly bears, but I have my doubts on that. They certainly have excellent dexterity - snatching fish out of a fast-moving river ain’t easy.
And yet a fish may be nimbler than a grizzly, right? The difference is that the grizzly is staying still, waiting for the perfect moment to move, watching the trajectory of the fish.
Which is what I’m getting at here. Charging means running at full speed into an attack. When you’re charging, you sacrifice agility for velocity. In a stand-off, I wouldn’t lay odds on the samurai’s reflexes; and a samurai that charges at a kodiak would be a hilarious fountain of blood. But if the bear is charging, and the samurai has a couple of seconds to get ready for it, then just as the waiting bear can catch the nimbler fish as it migrates, the samurai may have a split-second of advantage over the bear as it charges.
“May” is the key word there. I don’t know enough about bear reflexes, ability to stop on a dime, etc. to judge if that’s true. I’m seeing their top running speed is as high as 40 mph; it seems to me that’s gonna be hard to course-correct.
Also, this story is awesome: 78-year-old Canadian mountain man watches his son get attacked by a mama grizzly defending her cub, so he grabs a tree branch and starts whacking the bear about the nose until she leaves. Father and son survive.
I’m just saying, if a senior citizen with a tree branch can win, the samurai might have a fighting chance :).
Oh, my God, I don’t remember the last time a laughed this much after reading this forum. It’s late, but I can’t stop laughing. Sorry for the short hijack.
I don’t know…I saw a show with some guy trying to train a grizzly to hunt fish (I guess the bear had been captured when it was a cub or something), and the bear was less skilled catching the fish that the guy was. Training and practice are what let bears in the wild catch fish jumping out of the water…and I have serious doubts that most grizzly bears train very much attacking samurai, with our without armor…
Training and practice are what let bears in the wild catch fish jumping out of the water…and I have serious doubts that most grizzly bears train very much attacking samurai, with our without armor…