The Battle Begins! Knights or Samurais? Who would win?

In the debate, my group was rooting for the knights. Knights, in ways, are better than Samurai. Though the knights had heavy armor that weighed a lot, they wore gambesons, which were pads under the armor that helped ease the weight. This way, the armor was also more comfortable then just putting metal all over your body. Though others may say that the armor was so heavy and that the knights could barely walk around, the armor was made for moving. Though heavy, the knights have been in this armor for a while, so they would have experience battling with their armor. This armor was also more protective than the samurais', whose were made of some metal and leather, but didn't protect the whole body of the samurai. So a knight charging at full speed with his sword in front would plunge through the body of the samurai while the samurai, with no protection except his/her armor, would helplessly try to defend himself with bows and arrows and lighter swords. The knights' swords were definitely heavier, but they were strong, and if swung or directed at an enemy, the sword could give him or her a massive blow. The knights were also trained at about age 10, so they knew how to carry a weapon at an early age. Though the samurais had bows and arrows and the knights didn't really have long distance weapons in battle, the knights carried a shield with a free hand, blocking away arrows that tried to pierce through the knight. Furthermore, before becoming a real knight, the future knights would tag along with real knights on their missions and expeditions, getting lots of experience and a very important idea of how future battles would be like. You are more likely to know what to do if you've done it before.

Like the samurai followed Bushido, the knights followed chilvalry, which was a code of honor. There were very similar, but chivalry included protecting the weak, and women. Samurai often left their home, leaving their family alone, while the knights would stay near their castle, protecting the lord as well as their family living inside. On the castle walls, the knights could use catapults and other ways of attack and defence. This way, the knights wouldn't even need to move around, while the samurai would still have to. Lastly, knights were not suicidal like the samurai. Why kill yourself when doing just one dishonorable act? You could at least make it up by protecting your kingdom/lord/family/people and dying in battle. Knights, on the other hand, were given a 2nd chance and usually dies honorably protecting their people. But, this suicide was considered honorable to the samurai.

Though rooting for the knights and finding many ways in which knights could be better than samurai, I realized that both had their pros and cons. Like there are ways that knights are better than samurai, there are also ways that samurai are better than knights, which I have learned through the debating. Overall, I think that both the knights and samurai were strong warriors that had different ways in battle and were both honored by their people.