This is a mirror of the now defunct eesite ASOIAF webboard.

The discussions for G.R.R. Martin's awesome series "A Song of Ice and Fire" are now being held at: Current ASoIaF Webboard

You cannot post new messages to this board. Go to the Current ASoIaF Webboard for the most current discussions.

A Song of Ice and Fire / A Clash of Kings II / ACOK Celebrity Death Match II

Next 20 Messages Newest Messages
Snake
User ID: 0018434 		Oct 29th 8:05 AM
The ohter is full.

Ran: I'm not saying Loras' youth and inexperience is a disadvantage, which it probably is, but his size. In close quarters with someone larger and stronger could cause Loras some serious problems.

Have you ever seen the movie Rob Roy with Liam Neeson and Tim Roth. Remember there duel at the end. Roth was much more skilled and much quicker but Rob Roy's courage and raw power won in the end. It's hard to beat something like that.

On a different note, I felt that Neeson's portrayal of Rob Roy was a lot like the Ned Stark character. Unbelievably honorable and with a strong view of what was right and just.
KAH
User ID: 9209903 		Oct 29th 10:33 AM
I suppose what Ran is getting at, is that Loras will grow bigger than he is today. (of course, this would not be relevant in a death match held today)
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 29th 12:00 PM
Well, didn't think of that. I was just noting that no one was contesting that Loras was susceptible to surprise. He doesn't have a huge of amount of experience. He's only 17, after all, so I find it hard to credit any possible way to draw analogy to 30-something Bronn and his fight with Ser Vardis Egen.

As to size, sure it's a disadvantage. But speed has a lot to say for it, and dexterity. All fighters have advantages of disadvantages. Sure, someone bigger and stronger might cause problems, but then again there's always other factors -- speed, balance, dexterity, precision, training, experience, and so on.

Otherwise, Gregor Clegane will never be killed, because he's bigger and stronger than anyone else that we've yet seen in Westeros.
Steve
User ID: 9084913 		Oct 29th 2:46 PM
The problem Loras' faces is two-fold, inexperience in true battles (asa opposed to tourneys) and size. One will be cured over time. The other is a permenant handicap.

Not to say that he isn't, or won't become, a great fighter. He's already on the way.But all things considered, he probably won't be the best. Some bigger guy, who's just as skilled, fast and, maybe, even more experienced, will crush him someday.
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 29th 4:06 PM
Loras _is_ of average size, at least. He's not tiny.

Someone being bigger than you is always a disadvantage, but then that automatically means that Gregor Clegane is the very best there is -- and I don't think that's true.

The chances of a guy who fits all the criteria you suggest existing aren't all that great. In fact, the only person who's bigger and more experienced that I'd be willing to bank as being 'the best' is Sandor Clegane -- and he may not be as fast. Jaime Lannister is, no doubt, a little taller -- and surely more experienced -- but a little extra size doesn't make much difference.

Steve
User ID: 9084913 		Oct 29th 7:45 PM
As a former fencer (4 years, saber) I can attest that a little siz makes a huge difference. Specifically, reach. Even an inch or two is a defintie advantage.

Big guys beat little guys bloody all the time. This is not always tru, especially in case of a skilled or aggressive little guy facing a less skilled or agressive bigger guy. Unfortunately for little guys, or average guys, they don't have the market cornered on either skill, aggression, speed, etc...

That's why boxers and wrestlers are divided into size categories. A middlewieght would be crushed in a heavywieght division.

The result doesn't change much when you substitute a sword or axe for a fist. Its still direct physical combat.
Pikafreak
User ID: 9092003 		Oct 29th 11:54 PM
Steve: i thought that the nhl was a guy league or do they allow women to play?

as to the fights i think you are all taking this too seriously...try to remember that it's mtv's celebrity deathmatch!
bronn vs jamie-jamie's in the ring with his armor and bronn with his chainmail..the fight starts and bronn is blinded by jamie's shiny armor. jamie precedes to beat the crap out of bronn. as jamie is distracted by the hordes of women who think that he is completely gorgeous bronn recovers and starts attacking jamie. bronn gets jamie in a headlock. jamie tries to breath but gets killed by the awful stench of bronn's armpits...(seriously...this is the sort of stuff they'd have on mtv)
robb vs loras-each player starts off with an animal. loras gets on his horse as he prepares to charge at robb. robb has grey wind and as the fight starts...grey wind growls at loras on his horse and advances baring his teeth. the horse freaks out and throws loras off. the horse runs away and grey wind chases it. loras and his lance are flying through the air and loras lands ontop of his lance and is speared. the ref (i forget his name) raises robb's hand and declares him the winner...but what's this?!?! grey wind comes back and attacks robb, after all, it was grey wind who did all the fighting...
varys vs littlefinger-(heehee) each player starts off with their own personal bodyguards who do the fighting. but then the ref kicks them out and the real fight begins. there's a lot of name calling and playground cheapshots. ex: purple nurple (this was actually on one of the shows it's where the guy twists the other guy's nipple or something like that) finally varys, who is larger than littlefinger, manages to catch him and starts to sit on him. littlefinger is about to be squashed but just as varys sits down he jumps back up. there's a trap stuck to his butt! aparantly littlefinger came prepared...as varys rips the trap (and a large part of his rear end) littlefinger is unwrapping something...varys spots the chocolate in littlefinger's hands and starts drooling. littlefinger tells varys he can have the chocolate if he lets him win. varys obviously can't resist so he says ok. when varys finishs gobbling down the chocolate he turns on littlefinger and starts to throttle him. just as littlefinger's eyes start popping out, varys turns five shades of purple and drops dead. the ref declares littlefinger the winner and johhny and nick say "good fight. good night."
Steve
User ID: 9084913 		Oct 30th 2:28 AM
The NHL allows women to play hockey. Last I checked two women were awarded goalie contracts. One of them actually played a game or two and was sent back to the minors. The second was supposed to be pretty talented but got knocked up by her supposedly possessive husband. End of NHL career.

No woman has ever gotten a linemen contract. Too physical for them to have a snowball's chance in hell of actually getting off the ice under thier own power.

To give the NHL credit, unlike the NBA and NFL, they do allow women to try. Which, I think, is a good thing. Someday one or three or a dozen might actually make it.

Which is why I have no problem with the Brieene character. As ddescribed, she's probably one bad ass person. Probably not the best but don't take her lightly. What irks me is the supposed "Beauty" fantasy woman warrior character who kicks ass and takes names. Yeah, right. Martin has some good sarcasm going with Brieene's nickname.
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 30th 5:59 AM
Steve,

Fencing is a hell of a lot different from medieval style swordplay. Modern fencing is all about the point. Reach matters a lot more in modern fencing, but it's not exactly the most important factor in knightly combat when thrusting is kept to a minimum -- the coup de grace after you've battered your opponent down rather than the way to get your opponent down.

As to the classes for wrestlers and boxers, there's a big difference between that and using weapons against each other. There really is. Wrestling and to a lesser degree is all about using your weight. There's a certain level of finess and technique in these sports, but ultimately reach and weight and power are what matter.

Not so with weaponry, really. Weapons and armor are the great equalizers. A 5'2" guy can kill with a sword just like a 7'0" fellow. The superior strength and reach of the latter person will be a factor -- they have a better chance of getting through armor -- but they're not invariably the champions.

Otherwise, the Hound should have won all his contests, and Gregor Clegane would have a win streak spanning fifteen years. That's not how it works. Size is an advantage, but it can be a disadvantage. I'm not claiming that big guys are necessarily slow -- but do we _know_ that Gregor and Sandor are as fast as Loras? Not particularly.

If I'd make a wager, I'd say Gregor isn't, and Sandor might not be.

Snake
User ID: 0018434 		Oct 30th 11:28 AM
Gregor has fought a lot of battles. He is always given the most dangerous mission. He always survives. When Edmure and Co. defeated Gregor and Co., wasn't Gregor wounded several times? Yes. Did he die? No. He's too big and too strong. As the Hound said, no one can withstand Gregor.

The Hound hasn't, as far as I know, been defeated in battle.

Sure they both lost in tourneys but so what? I doubt Robert ever won a tourney, except for the melee, and Rhaegor seems to have been unbelievably good in the lists, but Robert crushed him on the Trident. Why, you ask? Because he was bigger, stronger and a helluva lot meaner.
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 30th 11:33 AM
Crushed him and crushed him . . .

Robert was wounded enough that he couldn't go on to race to KL.

Crushed would have been if he was barely winded when he killed Rhaegar. :)
Steve
User ID: 9084913 		Oct 30th 11:42 AM
Ran, modern fencing is presumably different than medieval slash and parry. However, no training manuals from the middle ages exist. Closest is from the rennaissance. So it could be very similar, or not. The whole objective is still to put steel on target.

Regardless, its the closest indicator we've got. And saber uses point (the thrust you referred to) and the edge, unlike foil and epee. Its a descendant of the medieval broadsword. REACH IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. Attack is based upon distance to target and timing. Reach is central to both.

Size is a key factor in direct physical combat. In the modern world, that includes boxing, wrestling, fencing and pugil sticks (I was also a Marine). I see no reason to doubt that medieval slash and parry would be any different.

Having said that, size is only one of several key factors. Physical conditioning, skill, experience, terrain, psychology, etc.. all play a role.

Unfortunatly for the average and little guys, they don't have an exclusive license on the other factors. A big guy is just as likely to be in good physical condition, skilled, possess a "warrior spirit", etc.. Real world people are not built on "equal points", ala some fantasy games.

Last I checked, the Hound did win all of his contests that we've seen. He beat Jaime Lannister. He's obviously good enough that Cersei wanted him to guard her pride and joy. Gregor is in a similar spot. He lost to Loras because he road a stallion and Loras road a mare in heat. Smart but that won't help him in a middle of a battle (or could be rather embarassing if some one's stallion tried to mount his mare).

Ned seemed to think that Gregor would chew Loras up and spit him out. There's a huge difference between being a tourney knight and mixing it up on the battlefield.
Snake
User ID: 0018434 		Oct 30th 11:50 AM
Gotta agree with you there Steve.

Ran. Robert crushed in Rhaegor's chest with his hammer. I didn't mean he beat him easily. I meant he literaly crushed him. WHAP! One blow from his hammer and it was over.

I'm sure Loras would inflict wounds or damage on anyone he fought, BUT, WHAP! and it's all over for the Pansy Man.
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 30th 11:54 AM
We know it's very different, Steve, because of weapon construction. ;)

Medieval swords up to the very late Middle Ages had practically no point. They were slashing weapons, pure and simple. Further, the description we get of combat in the books is primarily attacking with the edge.

In fact, the only kills with a point I can think of are Bronn's coup de grace in the Eyrie and Tyrion using a dagger to stab someone's eye through a helmet.

Yes, reach is a factor in all combat, but far less so than in modern fencing. It's a nice thing to have, but it's not as big an advantage.

Might I note that some competitors in Japanese kendo (where timing is extremely important and reach helps a lot) have shown that given all else, size isn't a huge disadvtange when you have superior speed or technique?

Not to say that Loras is superior in speed or skill to anyone else, but we don't _know_ that he isn't. What happens if he is?

Also, assuming that the Hound had been in KL for some of the past tournaments, he wasn't a finalist in the tourney that happened just before GoT started, and some four years before that it was Barristan Selmy who won.

We never see him pass up a tournament that has good opponents. The one in CoK was a joke, but before that, times were better. I doubt he did pass them up.

I'll also note that may Muslims rode mares into battle. There are chronicled accounts of the disadvtange this put the Crusaders at when the mares were in heat, because their very big and very masculine horses weren't exactly placid and their behavior became erratic in the heat of combat (heh).

Smart, surely. Not sure if it'll help him in a fight, but it wouldn't hinder him. Of course, in any case, no doubt he rides stallions to battle just like everyone else.

Finally, I don't believe it was Ned who said that Gregor would kill Loras. It was Littlefinger, IIRC, who stated that Gregor would send Loras' head back with a plum in his mouth. I find Littlefinger's opinions kind of dubious.
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 30th 12:00 PM
Snake,

I think it has to do with weaponry used. In most conditions, a sword can't break through plate in one blow. A warhammer can manage it in quite a few, though.

How different would the Trident have been, I wonder, if Rhaegar had used a warhammer as well? Robert might have been the one killed.

Loras has apparent proficiency with the sword and distinct skill with the longaxe (a better weapon for causing damage to foes in plate, though not as good defensively.) If he went up against someone with a longaxe, could he manage a one-blow kill? Probably, sure. It happens.
Snake
User ID: 0018434 		Oct 30th 12:25 PM
Ned could barely lift Roberts warhammer. I doubt Rhaegor would have one no matter what he used. Robert was just the baddest of the bad. Unbeatable.
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 30th 12:35 PM
If Rhaegar hit Robert five times for every one shot Robert got, which may well be the case, he probably would have won if he had been using a weapon better suited to breaking through armor.

Speed has its uses. ;)
labor
User ID: 8785553 		Oct 30th 6:28 PM

Snake, Steve Robert and Rhaegar fought for quite a long time before Rhaegar was killed, and Robert was grieviously wounded in the process - the war basically ended there for Robert. We can't really be sure that Robert was a that much better fighter than Rhaegar - even the greatest warriors don't always win. Not at the tourneys, not in RL.

BTW, I think that it would be interesting to look at the historical evidence about the medieval knights of high reknown - i.e. whether they all were big, hulking guys. I somehow doubt it, but the evidence will speak for itself.

BTW, Steve, I am not an expert, but don't certain forms of eastern martial arts provide an escape from the size disadvantage? I mean, I don't know how good was Bruce Lee in reality, but he was a kind of small and wiry guy. Also, isn't it a bit more difficult for a tall guy to be quick, than for a smaller one?
Steve
User ID: 9084913 		Oct 31st 0:49 AM
Sorry all. I've just returned from a Halloween party and am somewhat toasted.

I don't have any opinion on whether Robert was better than Rhaegar. I simply don't have enough info. Maybe Rhaegar was sick that day. Who knows. GRRM, that's who :)

Reach, size and fighting styles. Three issues which, in addition to others, impact an indivdual's fighting ability. Here's my two cents.

Fighting styles. I don't know epee and foil. I was a saber fencer. That means edge and point, mostly edge. That does not necessarily translate into a knowledge of broadsword tactics.

Which is what irritates me about people who say there is no relation between modern saber and broadsword work. Maybe they're right. On the other hand, every single published expert on the subject says "unknown." A case can be made either way.

In the pro column, both the broadsword and saber involve a straight blade. The objective is to put the blade on the target. There are only so many ways to efficently accomplish this task.

In the con column, saber does not involve shield or armor, as does a broadsword. The blades are heavier.

The answer is that NOBODY knows. Anyone who professes to know the "god's truth" on the subject is an ass.

Size. For anyone who thinks that it doesn't matter, or has only the barest impact, on a fight, I issue the following challenge. Walk into the nearest local dive. Find someone who outwieghs you by about 50 lbs and is at least 6 inches taller. Spit in his eye. Call his mother a whore. Knock over his beer. Will the fact that you are smaller translate into a sufficent speed advantage that you neutralize the size advantage? Discover the answer to this pressing question.

Reach. Big guys usually have it. Smaller guys might if they have arms like a gorilla. A trained swordsman will always know his distance from his opponent. A couple of inches will usually mean the difference between life and death, if a swordsman with longer reach can maintain his distance. It effectively creates a zone where one is in attack range and the other is not. Whether this is important I'll let you decide.

Bruce Lee. Everyone agrees that he was at the top of his game. Skill, conditioning, etc... Everything except size. Would he have beat a Mike Tyson in his prime? I don't know. Outside of movies, he never fought a Mike Tyson type.
Ran
User ID: 0283314 		Oct 31st 5:24 AM
Steve,

Manuals from the early to mid 1400's exist, and there are books which are dated tenatively as being even earlier. That's late Middle Ages to many scholars.

I'd point to http://www.aemma.org/ and its knowledge base. It has plates from some of these medieval books (plus Renaissance and later books dealing with rapiers and sabres and so on which you might find interesting). Of particular note is a collection of plates towards the bottom of the knowledge base from a manual tenatively dated to the late 13th century.

The most obvious difference between what these books show and modern fencing is the full-forward style shown in the medieval books. And you bring up some of the points -- like the fact that medieval weapons were heavier than modern fencing weapons, and the fact that medieval weapons often had to break through armor and not just puncture flesh.

While there are only so many ways to "effeciently" put steel on the opponent, the methods to put steel on an opponent without armor _must_ be different from those used for an opponent wearing it. Different levels of force necessary, meaning different foot positioning and balance, different technique, probably different timing, etc.

The experts who claim that archaelogical and archival information leaves the state of medieval combat unknown are, I'm afraid, being extremely conservative.

Also, as to distance, there's still armor to contend with.

Being able to attack with the last inch of your sword against steel plate helps nothing. If you're using a sword, you need to get in closer to try and have the opportunity for breaking through protected joints to get at the man in the tin can. If you're unarmored, sure, reach is more important.

But we're talking knights in field armor. There's a difference from modern fencing and, indeed, Renaissance fencing. The point just isn't that big a deal. Neither is reach, unless you've got six inches+ on your opponent (which, certainly, Gregor Clegane would have on just about all his opponents, I expect, but I haven't denied that he has physical advantages.)

In any case, I still find the idea that Loras is necessarily unequal to some of the other luminaries in Westeros difficult to swallow. We just haven't seen enough of him.

What we saw at the tournament at Bitterbridge was certainly impressive, and if he's the fellow who was dressed up as Renly, he seems to be able to cut through knights (including renowned tourney knights such as Guyard the Green, for what that's worth.) Could he be a match for Jaime with the sword? The Hound? Is he smart enough to be able to use Gregor's rage against him?

Who knows. I'm making no bets either way. ;)

Next 20 Messages Newest Messages