The Instigator
max_p_robertson
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
xxx200
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

knights where the best ancient warrior

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/27/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,440 times Debate No: 18510
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (7)

 

max_p_robertson

Pro

I believe that knights where the best ancient warrior

I await a challenger

Round 1 acceptance
xxx200

Con

but my opponent didn't say why knights are the best warrior. i would request him/her to do so.
Debate Round No. 1
max_p_robertson

Pro

well first of all they had the most exultant armour of there era: Maximilian full plate
They have a grate combination of weapons
long range: The crossbow
mid range The halberd or poll axe
special weapon: The morning star
short range the broadsword or dopelhander

You are allowed 1 warrior and 4 weapons choose wisely

Thank you
xxx200

Con

if my opponent means that knights are the best among ancient warriors, then i think that he perhaps did not consider other ancient warriors. the weapons you have mentioned i.e. sword, crossbow, poll axe etc. was used by all over the world by warrior in a variety of forms.since weapon used by knights are used by other warriors too, i am unable to find why knights were the best warrior and others are not.

morover my opponents did not define the term best warrior.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
max_p_robertson

Pro

I Think you shoud stick with one warior as I mentioned in the rules, one and only one This debate is soposed to be about You trying to find the warrior to defeat the knight

Choose one or loose points

Thank you
xxx200

Con

one warrior who can defeat the knights? well then ancient indian (bharat) warriors can defeat the knights because ancient indian warriors have these weapons which are more powerfull than the weapons of a knight:

1] elephants: a knight is usually a horseman. he cannot kill a giant elephant with his crossbow, sword and axe.but an elephant can crush many horsemen.

2] chariots: a knight did not have one. the benefit of chariot is it cannot be destroyed by a poll axe or crossbow or sword. but a horse can be killed by those weapons.ancient indian warriors have chariot so they are in a better position than knights.

3] fire arms: ancient indian warriors use fire arms which knights did not use.

source:http://www.hinduwisdom.info...

4] war machine: ancient indian warriors used war machines to fight which knights did not do.

source:http://www.hinduwisdom.info...
Debate Round No. 3
max_p_robertson

Pro

no firearms
Indian is out of the questions
it has to be pre firearms

Is is only fair
by the way thank you for following the rules
xxx200

Con

sorry, but indians used fire arms earlier. have you checked my links relating to fire arms?
Debate Round No. 4
max_p_robertson

Pro

Hey, no gun powder
Pre gun powder
Ill start a new debate since we wasted the first part of the debate

And yes I did read the link
xxx200

Con

ok no problem
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
max_p_robertsonxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Wow this was bad. Just....really, really bad. I give con sources because he provided one. Neither really made a coherent argument. All together, a debate I will do my best to forget as quickly as possible.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
max_p_robertsonxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro changed the rules each time Con made a point. However, Con did not capitalize, like on all on her debates.
Vote Placed by sammyc96 6 years ago
sammyc96
max_p_robertsonxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con totally dominated the argument pro changed the rules every time con made a good point
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 6 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
max_p_robertsonxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Mostly the same as 000ike's RFD, but I'm not giving either the win. Never seen such terrible arguments.
Vote Placed by jm_notguilty 6 years ago
jm_notguilty
max_p_robertsonxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: No one really convinced me here but I'll give sources to CON for supporting a weak argument.
Vote Placed by 000ike 6 years ago
000ike
max_p_robertsonxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro and Con both made equally weak and disorganized arguments, I don't feel comfortable giving either the win. Con loses conduct because his arguments were written in a font that is difficult to read. Pro loses spelling as well because he has far too many misspelled words. Con is the only one to use sources.
Vote Placed by OMGJustinBieber 6 years ago
OMGJustinBieber
max_p_robertsonxxx200Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made arguments. Went unanswered.