which is historically better ? a saber or a katana ?

>>1526920
A stick.

You might think that on foot without any off-hand weapons, the two-handed one would be obviously better because of the leverage and power of the cuts. But an one-handed grip allows full extension of the hand and thus better reach (not to mention that katana blades are quite short, of cutlass length basically), and the knucklebow of saber allows to do this without totally exposing the hand, and also the shorter grips allows certain rotations and moulinettes that are not really feasible with katana. Two-handed grip also presents more of your body to the opponent where as with one-handed grip you can stand more sideways.

Naturally if you have a pistol or the reins of a horse in your other hand, the one-handed saber is better.

Katanas or similar type of swords were never really widespread outside of Japan (though similar weapons were sometimes used in China I think) wereas sabers and saber-like weapons were used all over the world (European saber & cutlass, tulwar, shamshir, dao, scimitar....). So history at least suggests that saber might be the "better" weapon of the two.

>>1526920
u cant relly hold a katana unless u studied your whnole life how to use it or ull mess urself up. i would think the katana loses if its like u vs a clone of u, but if its a skilled person using the katana like a samurai or ninja they will win because its more agile coz its light weight and they know how to make use of it.