Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer. Art is everything else we do.
~ Donald Knuth
You’ll never appreciate the true complexity of a mundane, everyday task, until you’ve tried explaining it to a computer.
Contrary to popular perception, computers are not smart. Actually, they are stone dumb. Given a lengthy set of precise instructions, your computer can follow them well enough, most of the time, but when asked to exhibit the tiniest bit of reasoning or creativity, your cutting-edge laptop PC is helpless and hopeless. Ditto for the Mac. Sorry, Linux won’t help either.
Consider the simple act of making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. You can teach the average six year-old child this skill in a few minutes; writing the equivalent instructions for a general-purpose computer could literally take weeks or months of effort.
Knowing all this, I was amazed by the concept and promise of Spike TV’s new show, Deadliest Warrior:
In Los Angeles, CA, we’ve created a high-tech fight club, with scientists, martial arts experts, and lots and lots of weapons. It’s all here to create a virtual battle between two legendary warriors. We’ll test their weapons and fighting techniques on high-tech dummies—stand-ins for human victims. Based on this data, a battle simulation program will stage a true-to-life fight to the death. The winner will be The Deadliest Warrior.
Could it possibly be true? Would the endless debates over the ultimate fighting style finally be put to rest, by indisputable scientific evidence?
As it turns out, Deadliest Warrior devotes the majority of its screen time to slashing, stabbing and smashing test dummies with period weapons. The remainder is split between historical reenactment scenes, and bull sessions with their resident martial arts historians. Sadly, for those of us with an interest in the simulator itself, the show never describes its operation.
Slitherine Software UK, creators of Deadliest Warrior’s battle modeler, would not agree to an interview. So instead, I will take a wild stab at assessing how the software works, and whether it meets its promise as a scientific and objective judge of human warriors.
The Genesis of the Deadliest Warrior Sim
According to the SpikeTV’s producers, a team of programmers spent five years developing the Deadliest Warrior simulation engine. This is not precisely correct. Slitherine Software created a real-time strategy game—The History Channel’s Great Battles of Rome—and later tweaked this game for the specific use of the Deadliest Warrior program.
Great Battles of Rome is a role-playing game, with some references to true historical events. It does not, and is not intended to simulate the reality of ancient warfare in authentic detail. As in other RTS games, the game player serves as general over an army of semi-autonomous battle units, each possessing unique strengths, weaknesses, and methods of attack. Play consists of directing strategy and tactics, advance and retreat, to capture territory and defeat the forces of the opponent.
Troop types in GBoR include light and heavy infantry, archers, cavalry and war elephants. Cavalry presumably move faster than elephants, but are less powerful against a lone soldier; archers can attack safely from longer distances, but are handicapped by forest terrain; and so on.
These game rules were reworked for use on Deadliest Warrior. Instead of pitting two groups of one thousand warriors against each other in one giant battle, the software matches up two single warriors—an archetypal ninja and Spartan, or samurai and Viking raider—for one thousand consecutive matches.
Why repeat the same match one thousand times? Why can’t this high-tech computer simulation compute the correct results on the first try? The simple answer is that neither the simulation, nor its creators know how to do so.
Enter the Monte Carlo algorithm. Instead of dictating fixed values for each fighter’s metrics—their speed and agility, the range and power of their weapons, et cetera—the programmers define a range of possible values. The computer then runs a series of test cases, using random numbers that fall within those ranges. After sufficient test cases have been run, the computer aggregates the results to guess the most probable real-life conclusion.
With a random number generator determining the outcome of these battles, one might assume fairness and objectivity; but that would be a mistake. Underneath the Deadliest Warrior’s fancy wire-frame graphics and state-of-the-art ballistic weapons measurements, lies a set of flawed assumptions that destroy the show’s claims to scientific validity.
Ninja vs. Spartan
As any experienced martial artist can tell you, the fighting tactics shown in the final reenactments are laughable. On the show, “computer whiz” Max Geiger explains these episodes as dramatized composites of a sober statistical analysis; but in fact, the analysis itself is probably no closer to reality.
Random numbers alone do not make a battle. Remember that the computer does not know how to fight, nor is it capable of learning this independently. In the end, it can only follow instructions.
Clippy, The Deadliest Warrior?
Can you guess who wrote those instructions? (I’ll give you a hint: it wasn’t the International Ninja Council.)
Ultimately, these “scientific rules” of warfare were written not by experienced warriors, but by a group of programmers; and with the initial constraint that they should be simple enough to produce an entertaining computer game (Great Battles of Rome).
Theoretically, the Monte Carlo method might compensate for the programmers’ inability to identify the single most important factor in these warriors’ battle. (If we knew the answer to that question, there would be no need for a simulation.) Instead, they attempted to identify twenty different factors that could affect the outcome, and all the paths through which these factors can interact. In other words, they attempted to reduce mastery of the martial arts to a straightforward mathematical equation, and draw “scientific” conclusions from the use of that equation.
Understand that the art of fighting is not an output from this simulation; it is an input. It is not an experimental result, but a set of assertions written by software engineers. Whether or not these assertions are prima facie reasonable is irrelevant; dojo novices quickly learn that “reasonable” is not a working martial art. (Incidentally, this may explain why no computer scientists have yet won a UFC title.)
Considering the hidden complexity of the peanut butter and jelly sandwich, you might assume that a proper martial arts simulator would require many years of careful design, with input from experts in the fields of software engineering and martial arts. You would be correct.
Does Spike TV’s Deadliest Warrior reflect this disciplined approach to the intractable problem of single combat?
I can answer that in three words: severed pig carcasses.
Receive free updates by email or RSS
63 responses so far ↓
1
John Jr.
// May 7, 2009
I Love mathematics and a professor of mine once gave a perfect example of how dumb computers are.
Say you are graphing a quadratic equation. You could punch the numbers into a graphing calculator and the calculator would do some incredibly fast calculus to create a graph with many specific points. Whereas a student with a good understanding of the subject could draw an equally accurate graph in seconds. This is because the graph has meaning to the student. The calculator has know understanding of such things.
In order to create a completely accurate simulator there would have to be some representation of how the brain works. Something as simple as feeling the energy of a particular strike could trigger a memory/mental state that may seem unimportant but ultimately lead to different reactions. It would have to take emotions into account. Or small errors in technique. Or even intentional deviations from traditional technique. It seems like a cool idea and maybe interesting to read some of the data but I would not expect anything close to a perfect simulation.
It seems to me that a creative animator would have more luck in simulation. Because it would be his creativity (a human brain), and not the computer’s programmed rules, that create the outcome.
2
LF Cat
// May 7, 2009
Chris, you are taking this show entirely too seriously
as one of the commenters from your previous post said, if you are watching this show with a serious meter above 2, you are doing it wrong, lol… I have to admit this show is a guilty pleasure of mine, and it’s got the perfect formula to provide mental masturbation to satisfied the cavemen in all of us (much like everything on Spike TV).. you have to realize, folks who come up with these shows are media rating experts, they know what make the average male tick.. I hold the same attitude towards kung fu movies, UFC and MMA.. they are there for a reason, folks doing it are great athletes and guys love watching or even training in it to stroke off our inner bad ass alter ego.. but for deeper martial and personal development I look elsewhere in traditional arts.. everything has it’s place in this world, what matter is their place and meaning to you personally and I suppose
3
Bob Patterson
// May 8, 2009
My profession has something called information literacy. Chris is information literate and is applying critical thinking. Yes it is an entertainment show and I watch it as a guilty pleasure. I also watch UFO Hunters with that same pleasure.
Are either shows scientifically rigorous? Is baldness a hair color?
The problem is that John Q. Public here’s the word science and mostly due to their poor understanding of what it is, believes that the results are “scientific”.
Don’t get me wrong: They did have some decent science like measuring Chuck Liddel’s punching power.
But what about giving the Samurai a long range advantage because he could shoot the eyes of out a stationary target with his bow? Impressive shot but could he pull that off on a charging and weaving target? Or in a real situation where his adrenaline is jacked up?
Just too many variables for me to have faith in their “simulator”.
Still I frame it as entertainment and watch it.
4
Scott
// May 8, 2009
I think what’s going on here is that we have an almost religious desire for science to verify history.
If Jesus had been slapped using a “five-steps-down” palm, would he have been able to turn the other cheek?
If Chuck Liddel had delivered the knife to Caesar’s chest, would Caesar have been able too deliver the immortal question, “i tu Bruti?”
If High School History classes were this good, we’d be a nation of scholars.
5
Chris
// May 8, 2009
LF Cat et al, software engineering is my profession, martial arts is my hobby, I have pondered this exact project for many years, and I am entitled to take it seriously! Designing that sim would be an awesome job, and THEY are doing it wrong!
Scott, that is a good point. The Spartans had vanished from the earth centuries before the ninjas appeared; so if living is the game, Spartans are clearly losers.
If what we call “science” and what we call “history” will not corroborate each other, then what is the reality-based martial historian to do? At least one of them is wrong.
6
LF Cat
// May 8, 2009
Chris, I hear ya .. a more “realistic” sim would be kinda cool, but then again is it really possible to do it beyond entertainment and have any kinda real accuracy? Other than the fact that we don’t have all the hard data, there are just way too many variables.. what if it’s a constipated ninja vs a depressed spartan? What if the mob got a batch of bad ammo and one of the yazuka dudes ate an incorrectly prepared bloatfish? Even if we can time travel and pluck a few of these guys and toss them in an octagon, the results probably won’t be consistent.. it’s just not that hard to plug human spirit into a block of C++ code :p
7
Peter
// May 9, 2009
ep 2 – viking vs samurai. Fight simulation is not close to reality because of what scientist have put into computer: samurai was definitely much faster and definitely would never run from his opponent. Samurais were trained in jiujutsu and their life was one big training, they were real warriors, sacrificing their lifes to the art of war. Viking’s were just a barbarians looking for land and food, just murders with big axes. Of course vikings wasn’t complete noobs, but comparing these two in fight ‘viking and his sour vs samurai and his katana’ samurai should finish this fight much, much quicker. Just watch “the last samurai” with Tom Cruise and compare fights!
8
Neal Martin
// May 9, 2009
You could never invent a model to accurately reflect the outcome of such unpredictable human behavior. As most of the previous commentators have said, there is just way too many variables involved here. The whole thing is interesting to a point but I can’t see past the ingrained cynicism of the show creators and their desire for ratings. They know what people want and they have delivered that with “Deadliest Warrior”. Within that context the show is entertaining I suppose, but not to be taken seriously within any other context such as scientific research. Use your imagination and you’ll get a far better idea of the outcome in such matches and probably a more accurate one.
9
brandon
// May 9, 2009
Are other people allowed to use that graphic thing because i got a question thats driving e crazy. who would win? a roman or a barbarian? and i want to see who would win aginst a barbarian or a persian? i also want to see many battleson that graph sand thats why i want to download that graph. ( not to be rude) that it.
10
brandon
// May 9, 2009
I got just 1 more question. If the viking didint throw his sheld away, would he have won? Because i’ve been learning histery and i have never herd of a viking who throws away a weapen or a sheld.
11
Chris
// May 10, 2009
LF Cat,
My personal interests are not so much in who would beat whom, but how we might use a carefully designed simulator to improve and gain insight into our own martial arts.
Brandon,
Slitherine Software says that the Deadliest Warrior sim is not available for sale, but that the PC version of Great Battles of Rome will allow you to redefine troop attributes (e.g. to turn Roman legions into pseudo-samurai).
12
BJ
// May 12, 2009
Chris,
I hear what you’re driving at, and I think it’s essentially what professional gamblers have been trying to develop for years. Given stats in any given sport, could you make an equation or program that would tell me who’s going to win any athletic match-up? If that were possible, there would be no use in playing games or tournaments; predetermined stats would tell us the winner in advance.
It would be interesting to enter the stats of the fighters in the upcoming UFC 100 Mir/Lesner fight into the sim and see who it chooses… then lay all of my money on the other guy! Without a calculation for heart, the sim is an exercise in futility!
13
Chris
// May 12, 2009
Yes, it is hard to build heart into the model, and what doesn’t appear in the model becomes unimportant.
This is why philosophers say “there is no truth, only power.” Power is the ability to hide an elephant in an otherwise empty room. Thank you for your comment.
14
Dan Williams
// May 12, 2009
So, any fighter vs. a fighter of the same type would result in an infinite battle? Or at least a winner based only on random variables. We know for a FACT that this is not the case.
IMO, it’s not too different then the great debate of which martial style is the “best”, I’d would work on figuring out that one before I started in on this problem.
That said, I think experimental archeology is a fantastic endeavor. But the “this vs. that” is all Hollywood.
15
Chris
// May 12, 2009
Yes, all other things being equal, the guy with the sun in his eyes would lose. It’s not fair, maybe. But do we really know for a fact this is not the case? How could we, as all other things are never equal?
As for determining the ultimate martial arts style, I actually consider that a relatively simple problem.
16
Thomas Tan
// May 12, 2009
A match in martial arts is not equal, and never will be equal. The mistake in any style v. style match is that it actually takes the humanity out of the equation. There is no generic boxing, ninjutsu, or wrestling stylist; each practitioner is unique and has a unique set of given circumstances. Sure, we can generalize about the training methods and strengths of each kind of fighter (this is what the simulator on the show does), but in the end it is still just speculation because the human picture is too complex to fit into the programming (both the general human and the specific human).
This is why we will have these kinds of barroom debates until the end of time, and why the UFC was created in the first place. It’s also why neither will ever answer the questions initially asked.
17
BJ
// May 12, 2009
I’d say that the UFC has answered the question of which martial art is the best by showing that a combination is the best route, hence, MMA. Having a great ground game is wonderful, but if you can’t get the guy to follow you then it’s worthless. Take the Silva-Leites fight in UFC 97: Leites was the superior Jiu Jitsu fighter, but Silva wouldn’t follow him to the ground.
The best combat fighters need to be able to kick, punch, and grapple; this varied set of skills cuts across multiple disciplines. This also explains why militaries such as America and Russia have developed their own combat fighting styles (Sambo, Combatives) in order to best face down an enemy. No single system works as well in combat as a hybrid.
18
Dan Williams
// May 13, 2009
One comment about the UFC. I think these guys are highly talented, and I wouldn’t want to take anything from them, but toss a knife into the ring. Would the skills relate? Or would the habit of your opponent following the rules actually be a detriment? These are the issues that create the infinite barroom talks, god love ‘um.
19
Scott
// May 13, 2009
The question is really generated from history, and has little to do with individual prowess. Certain forms of war making are simply superior.
We know that only one historic battle in Japan lasted more than a day, because the Japanese way of war was for everybody put all their cards on the table at the same time.
And we know that the Greeks fought a lot against each other but once they were unified their phalanx was superior to other methods of war for a couple of hundred years.
And the Mongols too. Their approach to war making was undefeated for generations, perhaps they got a little push back from the slave soldiers of Egypt (Marmlukes) but their weren’t very many of them. Had the Mongols wanted to take Africa they surely could have.
Oh yeah, and America is pretty strong.
20
brandon
// May 13, 2009
Ok. I dont mean to some people but i dont understand how rushia beat the u.s.a. americans because the last time i checked we helped the rusins train and we had the best military weapens,soldiers,and teckneeks in the world. well most of the world. But te point is how wars the rushins able to get the better atvatage? And would we have won if the rushin missed?
21
BJ
// May 13, 2009
Dan,
Your knife example, in my opinion, only serves to bolster my argument that a hybrid knowledge of martial arts is superior to learning only one. UFC is an example of how fighters have mixed martial arts together in a way that best suits the setting. If knife fighting were introduced to UFC, I’m sure fighters would focus on Sambo, Combatives techniques and Escrima. But the knife fighting example in itself takes away from the idea of which hand-to-hand style is best. If weaponry is to be introduced into the mix, then it stands to reason that the best fighter in any match is the one who brings the best weapon, not the one with superior fighting skills. Enter guns and Army Combatives expert Matt Larsen’s assertation: “The winner of the hand-to-hand fight in combat is the one whose buddy shows up first with a gun.”
With all of that said, that is why I personally believe that UFC has confomred to MMA, and why I believe that MMA is the best form of fighting in NHB fighting, combat, and self-defense.
22
BJ
// May 13, 2009
Brandon,
The more I watch Deadliest Warrior, the sillier it seems to me. The simulation between the Green Beret and Spetnaz placed them in an urban environment where the Green Berets sniper weapons were useless. In prepping the battlefield, I highly doubt that a GB would allow himself to get into that type of situation. If a GB were placed in a situation where they were hamstrung like this, they would retrograde, refit, and re-engage from an advantageous position. Ditto for the Ninja in the Ninja/Spartan episode. DW doesn’t take intelligence into account, the Sun Tzu factor.
Another point of contention I have with the show comes from the Ninja episode. In the final stats, it shows the Ninja’s Black Eggs as never once having been the cause of the battles end, even in 1,000 simulations. I have trouble believing that in 1,000 go-rounds, a faceful of broken glass and pepper never once incapacitated the Spartan to the point of allowing the Ninja to finish the battle. I’ve been pepper-sprayed, and while I’ll not claim to be 1/10th of the badass of a Spartan warrior, I don’t believe that they’re going to just shrug off this type of attack and keep going like nothing happened. It sucks. A lot.
Final note: It was the Spartan’s phalanx which made them the fighting force they were. American communications and technology set us apart today. Ninjas would never enter into a fair fight in an open field or stick around if their first attack failed. Taking a warrior’s survivability out of the equation by taking away the elements that made each one great means that the results can never be valid. It’s fun to watch, but the “science” involved is not even close from what I can tell.
23
Dan Williams
// May 14, 2009
BJ, good points all. And yes you’re right that UFCish sport is evidence that it’s important to have a balanced approach to the martial arts. I’ve always felt that cage fighters are the experimental scientists of the martial arts.
It seems the consensus is, there are simply too many factors to this “simulation”, making the end fights nonsense.
For example lets do a little math:
If you have a set of numbers, lets say 20. Each one can be from 1-100, and you want to set a fudge factor of 10% for each. If we set each to 50 with a %10 fudge factor, when we add them together we get anything from 800-1200. So if we associate attributes to these numbers, and have a set for each fighter, and each weapon (ending up with hundreds of data points), and they’re even close to being matched fighters, the results actually tell us nothing at all. If we remove the fudge factor, we are then assuming that our numbers represent each attribute perfectly. We’re also assuming the 20 attributes are the only ones that effect the outcome.
Should we move on to the Batman Vs. Spiderman debate? I think there’s just as much chance of solving that mystery as the ones on the show. Spiderman FTW!
24
brandon hater
// May 14, 2009
Brandon,
Please for us all please learn how to type, and spell. i was reading this for fun… and you absolutely ruined it. “teckneeks” “rushins”? Try techniques, and Russians. Good christ man its painful to read, people like you ruin society and life as it was. PLEASE stay on your phone texting and not ruining this discussion. thanks, but no one else said it and it HAD to be said. Brandon LEARN TO SPELL.
Thanks, Eggs
25
Matthew S.
// May 14, 2009
Alright, get a grip. It is a TV SHOW.
Since you seem to need to list your credentials, I will oblige. I have practiced Boxing since I was seven, Hung Ga (that’s Kung Fu) since I was fourteen and Shaolin Kempo Karate For the last three years.
I work as a theoretical physicist for the FONAR corporation, so I have a little background in math. (Sarcasm, people you all need some in your life) [Although most of my everyday existence is math]
YES, computers are dumb, and unless you are using software from Caltech or MIT probably have very little, or no reasoning ability.
YES, combat is inherently vicious, unpredictable and completely dependent on the people involved, not to mention the environment and about a billion other variables.
YES, they are pitting opponents who would likely never have fought each other.
MOST IMPORTANT : YES, THIS IS ENTERTAINMENT MASQUERADING AS SCIENCE. That does not mean it is not (remember this word because I just used one just like it) ENTERTAINING.
I find it hysterical, that people try to come up with real scientific explanations for Star Trek and BattleStar Galactica Technology, and yet, no one throws as big a fit as they are about some TV about a Spartan fighting a ninja. Just think about that for a second. A SPARTAN vs. A NINJA. What?
It IS TV. get a grip, relax, make some popcorn, and enjoy.
26
Chris
// May 14, 2009
MATTHEW GET A GRIP. THIS IS A BLOG. RELAX AND ENJOY.
27
BJ
// May 14, 2009
Why is it that blogs seem to always boil down to personal attacks? I’m sitting here, wearing my Darth Vader helmet and sucking on my retainer, trying to have a heartfelt discussion on why a Ninja would totally kick a Spartan’s a**, and I start to see responses telling me to get a grip and relax. The whole point of this conversation was for me to relax. I’m writing this at work as an aside to, well, working. It’s a silly debate over a Spike TV program, I’m well aware as I’m sure most everyone else involved is aware. A few interesting points were raised, discussed, and debated. No harm was inflicted and a good time was had by all, until that is, other posters were accused of ruining society and life as we know it.
If you don’t want to discuss dork topics or feel that the topic is intellectually beneath you, then please move on without the name-calling or telling me to relax. I was having a good time up until this point and appreciated the merit of the blog.
BTW, Superman would kick Batman and Spiderman all over the place. Those other two are normal dudes in costumes, Superman is from another planet, duh…
28
Dan Williams
// May 15, 2009
But think about it BJ. Wouldn’t Batman be smart enough to realize that if he ever meet Superman, the only way to defeet (that’s for brandon hater) him would be Kryptonite?
So Superman says “Batman you can never defeat me, I’m from another planet, hahahahahaha!”
And Batman says “But within my utility belt, I’ve got a Kryptonite grenade, you’re advantage has become your downfall, hahahahaha!”
Batman 1
Superman 0
And yes, Superman would totally destroy Spiderman.
29
Abarel
// May 21, 2009
In the comics, Spidey built his web-shooters and could have easily laced one of the “silk packs” with kyptonite (he’s smart enough, we all know it) and thus bye-bye Superman. . .
30
lance
// May 23, 2009
You obviously know absolutely nothing about combat.Although the show IS,obviously,somewhat unrealistic,it never claims to be accurate,merely indicative.And since you are more concerned with the similator than the simulations,you also miss the whole POINT of the show.
[Edited. --Administrator]
31
Kozure Ōkami
// May 26, 2009
Give the show credit at least they’re doing a good job testing the armour and weapons and showing us the results (that part is reasonably interesting) – clearly weapon technology does give you the advantage.
But that’s what pisses me off is that the “vs” matchups are quite idiotic, they should really try to stick to warriors around the same era. Spartan vs a Granny with a XM307 Grenade launcher why not.
I’d like to see who would win between Chuck “The Truck” Wallace and Mike McAlister.
Lastly this Geiger guy is one seriously good BS merchant
“So can your computer program account for this”
“No, but I’m sure I can do something custom”
“No, but I’m sure I can tweak it a bit”
“No, but I’m sure I can come up with a BS excuse to make my scrolling MS excel spreadsheet look good”
etc. etc.
that’s why he’s the 21 year old computer whizz kid I guess.
32
mike
// May 27, 2009
In reference to some of the above comments. This discussion is about the program and whether it is true or lies to portray it as anything close to reality. I have watched the show and they have never, ever, pointed out that they were using a game simulator.
As a martial arts instructor, I have to listen to morons who use “information” from these types of shows to somehow prove my actual experience wrong. Therefore, It is not entertainment to me but a source of frustration.
The largest failing in the show and the program they use is simply tactics. They do not take any of the standardized tactics into account. A spartan would destroy the ninja simply because the spartan was a trained murderer while the ninja was a spy who’s main purpose was information retrieval. Any self respecting ninja would have poisoned the Spartans food. So, no fight unless the ninja fails and then dead ninja.
The samurai vs the viking. One was a thief and terrorist and the other was a wall of death. The very thing which stopped the viking era was armored assailants who didn’t run.
Am I the only one who read the original history of the gracies? Remember, before they started to change it every few years? The UFC was not to prove who was better, It was an infomercial to advertise the Gracie name. The first UFC which did not have a Gracie winner was the one where nobody wore a shirt. The Gracie had to actually punch someone and he hurt his hand and then couldn’t fight anymore. MMA only works because the rules allow it to work. Change the rules and change the art. This illustrates the problem with the show and the program. Each warrior was trained to fight under specific parameters. Taking warriors with standardized weaponry and having them fight unlikely opponents will simply be a mess with one getting lucky. Just like the early UFC where people would talk up their styles and then, in the ring, they looked like school children who ran into each other swinging until someone fell over. That is not what trained people do. If they say they have training then they are lying to you and themselves.
33
dannydarko
// May 27, 2009
Everyone should just calm down a bit. It’s just a TV show, nothing more. Yeah, it sucks that they try to make it look “scientific” and say the this is absolutely how it would turn out, but seriously anyone with a little common sense would see right through that lie. In every episode I’ve seen, there have been serious flaws in the way the “experts” think and in the simulations. (I mean, it’s obvious a ninja was trained to fight, and would never have thrown a throwing star at an opponent who is obviously well armored.) For anyone that gets uptight and starts complaining about it being unreal, check the channel you’re watching, it’s Spike TV after all. Oh, and Mike, let your students know that if they believe everything they see on television, they are naive and lack the most common property needed for any style of fighting, and that’s common sense, a rare and precious commodity in today’s society.
34
Sigel
// May 28, 2009
O_O… I see a brutal cycle slowly appearing wthin this blog, but I’ll ignore that for now. A simulator is made for many reasons, and one of them is to get probability on things that seems impossible to put into an equation just for the sake putting a range to an unknown. Well… that’s my way of thinking it. From the ‘O_O’, you could tell that I’m at a young age, but i think it’s comforting to have answers to unknown things.
35
der
// May 30, 2009
I think the one in armor would win…maybe.
36
Rocky
// May 30, 2009
The show is one attempt to simply make a guess based on easily accessible data on the most likely winner of two warrior classes that never met before. It is possible and likely that there is a better way to do it, but Spike and TDW producers are probably not interested in pursuing it.
And cheer up, it may not be on much longer. According to Wikipedia–take it with a grain of salt, I know–only nine episodes were scheduled anyway.
37
RSM
// Jun 1, 2009
I’d like to see retries with Massive or Softimage Behavior as core simulators. While both products also are intended to drive whole armies they’re quite aware of how environment and the actors skills/vital parameters interact.
38
Adum
// Jun 2, 2009
The program doesn’t determine which warrior will definitely win. It estimates a probability. If warrior X wins 999 battles out of 1000, there is still a chance that warrior Y would kill warrior X in any given single battle.
39
Anon
// Jun 5, 2009
While in close matches the randomness of everything makes the results meaningless, you can still get some rather meaningful results at overwhelming victories. So while nothing can be said about IRA winning against a Taliban squad, it is kinda obvious that Shaolin Monks would obliterate southern sea savages in a 1×1 scenario…
Oh, and I really hope that “computer whiz Max Geyger” was put there as a joke. The whole “I am using an alienware laptop to run a complex simulation using an Excel spreadsheet” routine always crack me up.
40
Chris
// Jun 5, 2009
If a Shaolin fighter has common sense, and an Maori warrior has common sense, then isn’t it obvious that the battle will NOT be decided by common sense?
Or by a simulator that applies simple fixed rules of combat, derived from common sense?
Or by a panel of judges that uses common sense to adjudicate the simulator results?
Come on folks, the “simulation” is indefensible and its product is completely meaningless. This is just common sense.
41
Josh Young
// Jun 6, 2009
Maori fighting arts verses Shaolin?
I’d think the maori would win… that is just my opinion. I am familiar with the combat methods and weapons of both groups.
Shaolin are monks, Maori are warriors. Shaolin martial art is designed to promote spiritual practice ability, Maori martial art was designed for war.
But who knows? I have no clue about any specific encounter without real factors being involved.
Ireland, Afghanistan and Iraq all deserve their Independence, nobody who fights for such a thing on the soil of their fathers fathers father is a terrorist, they are called patriots. I’d do the same thing if someone occupied my state by military force and murdered my brothers and sisters. The IRA verses Taliban is a joke.
42
A
// Jun 8, 2009
I’m afraid the critics here are missing the point.
This appears to be what is more generally known as an “Operations Research”, or for the Americans in the audience, an “Operations Analysis” simulation.
The point of this type of simulation is NOT to accurately simulate the course of any individual fight but to explore the statistical space.
This kind of simulation is very powerful for discovering trends and overall outcomes. It comes out of WWII and was really first used for developing tactics and weapons for countering the Uboats; ask any of the 70% of the Uboat force lying on the bottom of the Atlantic if it’s valid.
Seriously, if you really want to know what it’s all about Google “OR” or “O and A”, or “Monte Carlo Simulation” and you’ll find tons of stuff. It’s quite different from what we usually think of as simulation, but very useful, and quite valid.
43
Thrand
// Jun 9, 2009
Check out my videos on youtube (Viking vs. Samurai : Thrand’s aftermath) part one and 2 also 3 will be out shortly .There are clips from part 3 on my myspace account http://www.myspace.com/Thegn_Thrand
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpu2NRg-HEg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_qFq7QfUjI
44
Bullseye
// Jun 14, 2009
Thrand, at long last, I’ve finally found you on a site where I can post my opinions without going through any registration crap.
Yes, I’ve seen your videos. Yes, I see that you are a very well educated Viking expert, much more reliable than any expert that Deadliest Warrior has ever hired. Yet for over a month, your actions have left me very confused. Too many times have I run into you advertising your videos, trying to recruit people that will support your petition for the episode of Viking vs. Samurai to be redone. And I continually fail to see the point.
First, you’re fighting at Spike TV over historical accuracy, which is pointless considering that Spike’s target audience most likely doesn’t care. Second, have you ever seen any TV show redo an episode? No, because the time needed to do so could be better spent on a newer episode that’s most likely 10x better. Third, take a look again at the results for that episode. The Samurai won, but only had 522 kills over the Viking’s 478. This is the 3rd-closest episode in Season 1, and the closest episode where neither warrior was using modern guns. So, like the Spetsnaz’s victory over the Green Beret, and the IRA’s victory over the Taliban, the Samurai’s victory over the Viking was really too close to call accurately.
Can you accept the fact that the Viking just barely lost in a fight that appeared to be fair? Or are you so desperate to hear Max Geiger say “The Viking wins” that you’re willing to embark on such a childish crusade?
To the regular members of this blog, I’m sorry if I wasted a lot of space off-topic. I just wanted to finally tell Thrand my opinions over his efforts. And I hope that he even sees this post, let alone replies back.
45
Kitty
// Jun 15, 2009
Gidday Bullseye, This is Thrand’s wife.
The primary reason for Thrand doing all the posting and trying to get the fight redone is due to the fact that his family is an old danish family where mine is Norwegian which means our son is Scandinavian decent like we are. We want our son not to see our ancestors as idiots which they weren’t but as people skilled at the predominant form of warfare of their period and geographical location.
The other reason is that while it is true the people that generally watch spike T.V. aren’t looking for educational programs , when someone says that ‘this person is an expert’ they will believe it as well as that they are ‘going to find the worlds deadliest warrior’. If the fight is to find the deadliest warrior then technique is extremely important which they showed little to none of in the viking.
From what Thrand & I have been reading the samurai wasn’t accurate either for the portrayal.
To be truthful thou if spike would make sure there was a disclaimer on the show stating that the show may not show full historical technique and that it is only what their ‘experts’ know of, that is portrayed then it probably would have been fine.
Thrand also says that our ancestors fought to be remembered in the saga’s and immortalized, where now they will be more likely remembered as the school bully.
p.s the reason that I’m replying instead of thrand is that his written language is ….
46
Thrand
// Jun 16, 2009
Heil Bullseye Me wifey has spoken for me and I might say has done an excellent job
If my ancestors Died in history in such a way and they lived their lives to impress the Gods and be remembered for ever in the Sagas then to make light of what they did or say they where not skilled as another warrior group or stupid when cunning is what the prized. Is totally disgraceful. In my religion this is a sin and right up there with not being hospitable and friendly. So all I want is an accurate representation and not actors and wrong techniques . The simulation I have no control over but if their information they used is not based on the actual Facts and historical evidence and they say that it is and history then every thing they have done in the Sagas becomes Questioned and There skill and cunning as well. Tell me if they had the Samurai lose because of that Kanabo he never used ,what would the Japanfiles done screamed they dint even use it after they took time to look up the actual Samurai. My point being What they did to the viking was horrible and those so called experts where not in the least a laymen could have come up with better weapon usage and technique who runs with 2 spears not meant to be thrown at an archer with out their shield out I will tell you a Hollywood actor who doesn’t understand true combat . If those experts wanna come suite up in armor and fight society of creative anachronism rules I think you will see after many bruises on their part and many laughs on mine they are not warriors and after a question and answer contest like the old Norse played they know nothing either but if they where brave enough to actually do that I would probably drink a home brewed Ale with them in respect that at least they are brave 
47
Thrand
// Jun 16, 2009
Viking Team: Casey Hendershot (Viking Weapons Instructor?), Matt Nelson (Viking Combat Expert, Descendant of Danish Vikings???)
Samurai Team: Tetsuro Shigematsu (Samurai Descendant??), Brett Chan (Samurai Weapons Expert??)
Casey Hendershot
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1105343/
Matt Nelson
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3397956/
Brett Chan
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0150812/
Tetsuro Shigematsu on wiki too
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetsuro_Shigematsu
Stuntmen and Actors makes Hollywood not History
48
Taiter
// Jun 16, 2009
This show is absolutely wonderful!! My favourite episode is Pirate vs. Knight. I’m glad Pirate won! Just 3 more episodes to go. If only there was an appropiate video source…
49
shawn
// Jun 18, 2009
oh your just pissed cuz ninja’s lost. pirates rule bitch.
50
Thrand
// Jun 20, 2009
All four videos are out (Viking vs. Samurai : Thrand’s aftermath part 1 , 2 and 3 plus fighting bonus video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpu2NRg-HEg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_qFq7QfUjI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q74SOH9Bgp4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEEuxzfEmX8
Be sure Send Spike TV Deadliest Warrior and Email we Want then to admit the viking so called experts misrepresented the viking historically in the new aftermath or we are going to boycott all there product and advertisers til they do JA!!!!!!
Vikings are not dumb and are skilled warriors and would not make mistakes that idiotic!!!!!!
51
Thrand
// Jun 20, 2009
Viking vs. Samurai I found proof he is a real samurai expert!!! off Viking vs. Samurai Deadliest Warrior Spike TV!!!!!!
Tetsuro Shigematsu( Samurai Descendant ) Great Samurai videos check them out!!!!!!
http://shigematsu.com/tetsuro/videos/standup.wmv
http://shigematsu.com/tetsuro/videos/pop.wmv
http://shigematsu.com/tetsuro/videos/chinese.wmv
http://shigematsu.com/tetsuro/videos/Albert.wmv
52
Thrand
// Jun 20, 2009
Casey Hendershot (Viking Weapons Instructor?)
Casey Hendershot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eF4bSiLOkeI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTlkNX2eOR4
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1105343/
53
Brandon
// Jun 23, 2009
When is GREAT BATTLES of ROME coming out? Because it dosint say in the blog.
54
Brandon
// Jun 23, 2009
Is there going to be another season or is that just it?
55
Chris
// Jun 23, 2009
Brandon, Great Battles of Rome was released years ago.
Thrand, in the future, please limit yourself to 1-2 links per comment, and be sure to explain how they are relevant, and/or why you think anyone should click on them.
56
Sionnach Bán
// Jul 15, 2009
you have reached the bottom of the trollpit…
57
serious sam
// Sep 1, 2009
why dont we just make inmates train as different type of warriors and have em battle it out
58
Tony
// Sep 3, 2009
I need a simulator!!
59
Zombiegamer
// Sep 21, 2009
So isn’t basically the cycle for most topics would be, someone would either create a post either to create profits, or to challenge validity off of something. In which would create a dispute against what is true and what isn’t even though everyone has a different point of perspective based on personal thoughts? In which people would either argue to the end, or until something better comes up?
60
J
// Oct 26, 2009
I have to strongly agree with the introductory explanation of this post. Unless the computer program was written with the complex knowledge of close combat, any program written is going to fail to accurately create a combat simulation. This is because computers, as has been said before, run on an if-then command system. It doesn’t matter what kind of computer you use, what type of code processing you use or any of that. This is a rudimentary fact of all computers world-wide. Human beings have the capacity of if-then functions but are not restricted to them. The way that they behave in a combat situation is never the same as the next person, and one person may even have different reactions based on many variables. These kinds of variables are unable to be quantified and so are beyond the scope of a computerized simulation. Computers act in a very deliberate and predictable manner, based on the scope of the code that tells it what to do and when to do it. Because of this static interaction there is no way that a computer can hope to incorporate ingenuity, adaptability, survival or will (all skills used to survive in combat) into a simulation.
61
elemant
// Nov 13, 2009
in think they should do one about the two deadlist modren day warriors navy seal vs isreali counter terriorist ops the smack down of the century!!
62
J
// Nov 15, 2009
I know this is old, but it’s the internet so I’ll throw my opinion in.
Firstly I’m not the J that posted before! NAME STEALER! Kidding. We have an awesome name. Secondly I think a lot of the posters talking about the battles in the show “Would the viking win if he didn’t throw his shield away” Thats not what actually occurs in the simulation. It’s just stupid actors and CG, which is part of why we’re so curious.
Also I note that me and my boyfriend and brother all watched the show and all care very much about historical accuracy. Additionally we love BS entertainment as much as anyone, I’m a big Bullshit and Mythbusters fan, however we like it when it isn’t passed off as science. Which they clearly try to do. They In no real way besides off handed try to say that they aren’t being totally accurate.
Also something that bothered me.
Ninjas aren’t information gatherers. They were farmers and assasins. Samurai weren’t terrorists (albeit some were thieves). Samurai worked for Japanese nobles, so if the samurai were terrorists, does that mean the nobles were terrorists leaders? You can’t apply modern day relations to such a thing, sure they’d be terrorists now, but back then that’s how it was. And when the Samurai finally ronanized they were still not terrorists. The government never specifically tried to stop them and as far as I know the anti-sword laws weren’t so much to stop Samurai as to keep peace and protect the government and law. Similar to Britains anti-gun laws. They aren’t try to stop gangs really because you can still get a gun easily enough.
Thank you, that’s all for now <3 I also love this blog post. It was so hard to find any information on what the fuck their simulation might be.
‘Deadliest Warrior’ My Arse « The BS Historian // Jul 5, 2009
[...] which is then interpreted over a series of encounters using a modified piece of computer game code. These guys have taken a closer look at it, and to me its clear that even ignoring the dubious data [...]
Leave a Comment