The Deadliest Warrior Gets This One Wrong

I watched the episode where the Roman Centurion battled the Rajput warrior. I felt they dropped the ball on this one. I fail to see how a Rajput - even one on one - could take down a Roman soldier. In a field of battle, given Roman organization and battle tactics, the Rajput would likely be an easy enemy to conquer.

Like with anything, people debate the results and in this case (like other shows I'm sure) the use of certain weapons was debateable. The Rajput certainly get a lot of points for the inventiveness of their weapons but seriously, the chakrum would be useless in a battle against the Romans. As would some other of their weapons despite the lethality and excellent martial arts capabilities of the Rajput. The other thing I found odd was the use of a man well over 200lbs and six feet to test the weapons. According to the show itself, the average size of a Rajput was similar to a Roman at 5 feet 8 inches. Wouldn't the use of a large man skew the effectiveness of the weapon?

Last and not least, the main reason why I would take the result with a grain of salt is the bizarre decision to neglect the use of the Roman shield - the cornerstone of the the Roman legionaire. One need only look at the episode pitting the Spartans against the Ninja to see how wickedly and absurdly useful a shield is. I would have liked to have seen most of the Rajput weapons tested against the shield and really, the military prowess and tactics of a Roman - again, even one on one - was under valued in this episode.

I understand the show's premise is deadliest warrior and in fact has little to do with overall military power (even though they try to deal with this with those five on five battles) but still...

The Romans were like Spartans and how the producers overlooked the shield is a glaring omission.

I'll stick to my own belief on this one: The Rajput would be over run by the ruthless Roman army.