“Deadliest Warrior”
Tuesdays at 10 p.m.
Spike

1.5 out of 5 stars

Who would win in a fight: a ninja or a Spartan? OK, how about a pirate versus a knight? Questions like these have been hotly debated by stoned college students for hours on end but without any sort of evidence. These arguments have never been officially resolved — until now.

Spike’s newest addition to its line-up, “Deadliest Warrior,” attempts to set the record straight once and for all.

Science and rigor are heavily emphasized in “Deadliest Warrior.” The premier pits an Apache warrior against an ancient Roman gladiator. Their respective weapons are tested for lethality, and the weapon data, along with other factors like fighting style and armor, are entered into a computer program that simulates 1,000 fights between the two. Whoever wins the majority of the fights is deemed the superior fighter.

This “science” is explained by the show’s narrator, who uses a bizarre fake accent to make the things seem more epic. But it’s difficult to pay attention to what someone is saying when you’re just trying to figure out why he's talking so strangely.

The most obvious problem with “Deadliest Warrior,” though, is figuring out whether its tests are technically accurate or inaccurate. There’s no evidence this science actually works. Rather than making the details understandable for the average viewer, the scientists make the testing and computer software sound shady and under-developed.

The show focuses primarily on weaponry as the determining factor in who will win a fight. As a result, a lot of other combat factors are underemphasized. It seems strange — and scientifically irresponsible — that the strength and speed of individual competitors are disregarded in the equation. Apache warriors and gladiators are from completely different societies, and it’s reasonable to assume they wouldn’t be evenly matched in muscle and swiftness — but then again, we're not the “experts.”

Combat environment is also overlooked. An Apache warrior probably wouldn’t hold up well in an arena, and a gladiator would have more difficulty against a surprise ambush. It’s possible that neither combatant would know how to fight without home-field advantage. But the show assumes each's fighting style doesn’t change with location — an obvious error considering the final showdown is set in a North American forest, which should give the Apache an advantage.

What detracts from any air of seriousness the show hopes to create are its theatrical reenactments, complete with low-budget costumes, poorly choreographed fights and bucket after bucket of fake blood. The show uses these reenactments of Apache ambushes and gladiator battles whenever possible. They are hilariously corny the first few times, but quickly became annoying and overused. As a result, the final showdown between the Apache and the gladiator, which is supposed to be the show's climax, loses all suspense and is perhaps even more boring than the reenactments preceding it.

“Deadliest Warrior” might sound cool, with future episodes promising showdowns between the Yakuza and the Mafia and between a Samurai and a Viking. Still, the overall cheese factor and shoddy science of “Deadliest Warrior” turn the cool idea into a sad failure.