1) The groove on blades isn’t meant to allow blood flow, or cut better or any of that crap. Its called a fuller and its meant to lighten the blade without weakening it.

2) Curved blades don’t move faster or cut better. The ability of a blade to cut depends on alot of things, and the very gentle curve of the katana makes little difference to the cutting ability.

The curved shape of the Katana comes from the fact it descends from a cavalry sabre, where the curved shape allows you to attack targets on the ground without losing the blade.Europeans used lots of curved blades, some of which like the Kreigsmesser looked just like a Katana with a western crossguard.

3) The Katana was folded because Japanese steel making technology sucked, and folding was needed to turn the shitty iron into good steel. They learned the technique from the chinese, and every sword making culture on the planet knew how to do it. Euro smiths stopped employing the technique because euro steel was alot better and didn’t need the folding process.

4) European longsword was half a foot longer than a Katana and weighed the same! between 2.5 to 3.5 pounds. IT WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR CUTTING ARMOUR. You cannot cut face hardened steel plates with a sword. European swords handle just as well, move just as well, cut just as well, and were just as finely forged as the Katana. The only thing the Katana has going for it is Hype

These guys are using fully weighted longswords and they aren’t slow or clumsy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjT4JepA-Vc

5) Plate armour was neither heavy nor clumsy. A full suit of plate was less encumbering than the classic o yoroi. It weighed about 60 pounds, was very finely articulated, with superb weight distribution and did not encumber much at all. You can do cartwheels, gymnastics, sprints and even swim in it.

~Peace

PS. I bet half of you who have commented havent even used a sword before

The european sword (Damascus, Broadsword, Claymore e.t.c.) was used primarily as a show of stength. The armour worn in combat against these swords weighed down the warrior and limited movement. In a fight it doesn’t matter how much power or srtrength you have if your opponent is too fast it is useless.

THIS is why the katana was considered and still is considered one of the greatest weapons used in armed combat.

each sword was made for different purposes, in order to confront european heavy armor, the oriental, in this case the katana, to cross the light armor.

if it is true that the katana is the most honorable representation of a samurai, it is true that Rounin took them and attack them

the strength of the katana is the speed and precision of the cut, the strength of europe is the brute force as such.

sorry for my poor english

The reason Japanese are seen as better is as swordsmen is that Europeans had phased out the sword for a few hundred years. I would contend that Europeans were MUCH better than attributed for but much of the lore got lost. There are still a few schools of weird martial arts available in Europe, usually being carried onward by just one master. One of the pities is that the European tradition is almost all but lost because the sword became extinct in a real battlefield.

In any case a real sword fight is actually very booring to watch as uninitiated, theres a reason why gladiators were a special breed of fighters trained for molecularity over practicality. MOST sword fights end in a few seconds, usually the first one to move within range loosing the game.

But I wouldnt dismiss the quality of a katana, having wielded a real one i must say its a very fine piece of weaponry. European swords usually being a bit inferior in quality, but rest assured its enough. The end difference in combat is not significant, indeed the samurai wouldnt risk loosing their katana* in battle.

Besides for war I would pick a pole arm every time. So the samurai who used a Yari are indeed on to something (I would be happy to use a glaive the european counterpart, in combat against any of you wielding the best katana, you loose almost by default) A sword has its uses, but not the best thing to wield in war. Mainly better as a sidearm than a 6-12 foot pole.

PS. By the way a katana can be used for thrusting. The first time I saw that in real time directed at me I went, huh, what just happened and passed out.

They are comparable to the katanas at streight , flexibility and ability to cut.

But there is one more thing the Katana has and this thing is unique to it, and actually is the reason I put my vote on the katana: the shape of the Katana is much more aerodinamic , means it allows you to cut more precise, and apply blow after blow with almost no time between them. Compared to that the Damascus sword is rather bulky. To compare a Katana with a Damascus sword at this chapter is comparing a surgeons scalpen to a butcher’s knife. When fighting a lot of people in a crowded place the Damascus sword is better, but for anything else Katana alll the way.