The IRA have never been warriors. They are a sneaky, cowardly terrorist organisation that has killed as many innocents as it has 'legitimate targets'.
Those innocents include women and children by the way.
They use fear and intimidation, picking on the most vulnerable in their communities and forcing them to their will.
I was in Northern Ireland when they blew up a fishmongers in 1993. 10 shoppers were killed. Including children.
Is that a warrior??????????????????
The producers of this show need to do their research before they upset an awful lot of people. The families of those killed still bear the loss and the pain of such atrocities.

Funny you go off on the provisional IRA and neglect to mention a single thing about the Taliban? Might you be a member of the Ulster terrorists? At least the Provos don't cut off people's heads or beat women to death for showing an ankle. Perhaps if the UK cops actually cared enough to clear the buildings when they received warnings, there would have been few to no deaths.

Step one, check facts. Step two, vent spleen...

FIRST, no terrorists are "warriors", they kill and bomb innocent people, they do not fight with other "warriors", this show is disgusting, and i hope spike has enough sense to pull this episode from the air before they piss off a LOT of people. the families of the victims of terrorists will be up in arms over this and i think whoevers idea this particular episode was should be shot for being so stupid.

also...who the f**k are they going to get to be there taliban "expert"?...im sure Homeland Security would like to know.

Have to agree with Adoe 100% on this one. Whilst the fantasy bloodshed league that is "Deadliest Warrior" might titillate people with 50 minutes of ballistic gel torso porn, followed by a short mock up, I think it is probably advicable that they stick to the truly historical warriors. The idea of modern day terrorist organisations being compared in the degrees of mutilation and death they cause is repugnant, and certainly isn’t the edutainment that this programme claims to provide. I don't think any sane individual would cheer or leer at the simulated outcomes of a pIRA proxy bomb or the Al-Qaeda attacks in 2001.

I have given this show 3 episodes to win me over so far mainly due to the two credible experts, and their charismatic nature referring of course to the Physician Armand Dorian and the Engineer Geoff Desmoullin. However the extremely confrontational nature of the advocates, coupled with the biased computer expert Max Geiger I find alarming. In a show which has tons of room for lively debate, back and forth and interesting discussion instead we see what is effectively 50 minutes of mock corpse and pig carcass mutilation. Add to this the fact that Geiger is effectively skewing the results being fed into the software from Slitherine in the form of sample or reporting bias, makes for very poor viewing. To fix this show from truly going down the tubes they need to make some changes.

Firstly I would keep Geiger out of the testing area, he doesn’t need to see or witness anything other than the reports of Desmoullin and Dorian. His opinions and credibility is questionable regarding the “science” being conducted and as such he must be kept away from the testing. Secondly the show must credit it’s viewers with a little intelligence. Any sort of dialogue on tactics between the advocates that doesn’t descend into casual apache threats of violence or beta male posturing would be appreciated. More often than not this show appears to be comparing disparate styles of conflict, and as such they should play on that. Lastly the show needs to divorce itself from the weapon Vs weapon approach. It doesn’t work, and makes for dull and often unintuitive comparison. If you are going to all this effort, at least make the weapon testing meaningful rather than mindless data collection. Using a good example the show has already used the Spartan, and it is widely held that the tactical advantage and force multipliers worked strongly in this case at Thermopylae, I have no doubt that in a direct comparison of weapons the Persians would have been fairly equivalent to the Spartans.

I do think Islesfan needs to wake up and smell the Irish coffee though. It has been proven time and time again that the conflicting sides both Nationalist and Loyalist in Northern Ireland are little more than fronts for organised crime in the form of Raquetering, prostitution and drugs. His extremely ignorant statement regarding the bombing of Frizzell's in 1993 shows a lack of understanding and sympathy towards the victims, the like of which only a sociopath would share, but then again I guess the IRA gave warning in good time in Omagh correct? Additionally regarding beheadings and ritualistic beatings the provisional IRA are no saints, with a track record of disappeared people, tortures resulting in murder and “punishment beatings” for over thirty years. The IRA are in no way better or more justified for their actions than any other terrorist group on the planet, terrorism is terrorism and it is designed to inflict itself on the public rather than the armed forces where possible. Don’t get me wrong I certainly don’t condone any side in the conflict in Northern Ireland, but as a resident I felt compelled to respond. Islesfan in those few short and rather poorly constructed sentences you have represented yourself as the worst kind of human being alive today, condoning the killing of innocent people places you squarely among the group of people that will happily decapitate western reporters in Iraq.

Getting back to the show however, I think it’s time for Deadliest Warrior to go down for the count for a few weeks, at least until there is some element that the show is less about carcass mutilation and more about fighting science.

Geneboy:

I must disagree about your statement that it is solely that the show is only about pig gutting and weapon comparison and does not incorporate anything about tactics.

For instance, if the victor rested solely on weapon comparison, then in the episode "Shaolin Monk vs Maori warrior" then the Maori warrior would have won. But he didn't, the Monk did. The Maori warrior had the superior height, reach, and more than likely physical strength. He one 3 out of 4 weapon comparisons and proved that the Green stone the Maori's used for weaponry was stronger than the steel used to forge the Monk's weapons, an yet he still lost to the monks superior agility, skill, and precision with their weapons.

Then there is the fact that a lot of the matches tied on who won in the weapons comparisons.

Apache Vs. Gladiator:
Apache wins: Close combat (Tomahawk) and Long Range (Bow).

Gladiator wins: Special (the bent sword) and Mid range (Trident and net).

Samurai vs Viking
Samurai wins Long range and Special (Yumi and BIG FRICKIN CLUB).
Viking wins Close and Mid range (Great Axe and Longsword).

and so on for more than half the episodes.

Now the pig carcasses and the gel torso's do serve 2 functions.

1) To give a realistic demonstration of how much damage one can do with any of these weapons. WIthout that, then there would be no show.

2) I hate to say this one but it does help get ratings. People like conflict in their entertainment for as long as anyone can remember and the demonstrations do pander to people's bloodlust.

Also, how is Max Geiger biased? I'm gonna have to ask for an example to back that claim up.

He puts the data in true, but Max, Armond Dorian, and Geoff Desmoullin basically form a 3 person panel to decide what data is being put in in the first place. It's just the fact that Max is the face seen when the data is being put in. But it's readily apparent (as they have had conflicts over weapons) that he has been overruled before (Viking Spear vs. Samurai Yumi. Max supported the Viking spear but Geoff favored the Yumi and as the Yumi won that little bout then I'm guessing he got outnumbered on that one).

Also: Yes I do agree that the IRA and the Taliban are not what I would consider "warriors" why is everyone up in arms about this? I mean if you look through history anyone who was a warrior would, by today's standards, be considered a psychopath or a tyrant (exceptions being made for people like the Shaolin Monks who's motivation was normally self defense or protection of others. I'm sorry if you disagree but I've never heard of the monks being the one's doing the invading. If I'm wrong please cite examples and I will gladly find out what my foot tastes like).

I mean look at the Knight vs Pirate episode. The Knight guy's even said that a lot of the Knight's motivation was that they had God backing them up (sound like anyone that we in today's society would know? hmmmm???). "The knights believed that they had God behind them so they were good and anyone who opposed them was evil."

The only real problem that I see in the program is mainly the fact that it is always a straight up fight, which does not always cater to everyone's style. I mean what the guy said at the end of the Ninja vs Spartan episode is true "if a Ninja saw a Spartan in real life, he'd run away come back and kill him in his sleep".

Well perhaps biased is the incorrect term to use, however unqualified is not right? Max is the computer expert no doubt, and his CV backs that up. However regarding the fighting science he really doesn't have the chops to either make calls or critiques. As such, I wouldn't be surprised if the act of him witnessing the tests and outcomes would inherently skew the results consciously or otherwise. Such sampling and reporting biases are extremely common, and often very difficult to detect. I would rather he be given more time with the advocates developing scenarios for testing, so that the “1000 simulations” could actually be meaningful and representative of the tactics and mindsets of the warriors”. Keep Geoff and Armand in the fight room, and Max in the computer area and set aside a segment dedicated to the actual mechanics of the data collection being converted into the simulation data and subsequent outcome. I’m sure that I am like many curious as to how Max works with the siltherine software, which frankly at the moment is presented as a magic box and not a tool of inquiry.

Regarding the weapon Vs weapon criticism, I believe it is still valid and currently the downfall of the programme. Certainly it’s something they try to skirt around on the online “Aftermath” segment, and in the show there is no reference to data aside from weapons and armour coming into play. If I am mistaken then I stand corrected, but as I see it the power of the warriors being tested comes in equal quantities from the mind, strategy and tactics as much as the swords and shields. Ultimately the difference between an easy 45 minutes on the brain and a truly engaging piece of science edutainment is found here. It is nearly thirty years since Carl Sagan’s Cosmos was released and even today it is referenced; likewise Attenborough’s Life on earth has been here for thirty years and still holds the same degree of kudos; is it really too much to ask that if people go to this kind of effort to produce a show that they think a little of the lasting impact? The premise may be a little twee, but that’s no reason to resort to the lowest common denominator stuff being employed.

Finally back to the IRA vs Taliban. I find it alarming that the producers think this is appropriate. Being a resident of Northern Ireland I feel that it is highly inappropriate, much in the same way that I would have no doubt an American audience would find the idea of simulating the carnage caused by the terrorist bombers 9/11. How does one simulate a proxy bomb, or a National stadium converted to a killing field for executions? How can anyone be an advocate for that?

You can probably find the Slytherine software itself online (at least a description of it) and then you could see first hand how it works. My impression (and as Max described in Mafia vs Yakuza) is that it was originally designed for army on army combat, and all they did was scale it down.

I can also think of a reason as for why they don't show the data input mechanics. Mainly because the vast majority of people aren't computer savvy enough to be able to understand it. It also wouldn't be conducive to ratings. This is not a documentary, it's a TV show. The higher the ratings, the better chance they have to have a second season.

I am an american and I will tell you that 9/11 was terrible for us. But the Taliban have done more than 9/11. 9/11 is what brought it to the for front (just as Pearl Harbor brought WW II to our door).

But they are not simulating 9/11. They are not simulating any specific explosions or acts that took place in Northern Ireland. They are comparing two fighting forces. They are not glorifying any of their acts. They are displaying their destructive capabilities and comparing them, that's it. They don't say "Oh the IRA are cool" or anything like that. They are seeing who would win in a fight.

and on the weapon vs weapon deal, I think you and I will have to disagree.