Cut vs. thrust

The debate of whether cuts or thrusts are superior has been addressed many times. ScholaGladiatoria covered it, Skallagrim covered it, and people within the history covered it. I just want to place my thoughts in addition, though there will be plenty of overlap.

Cutting

There are 2 types of cuts: the chop (think axe) and the slice (think saw). To cut is more natural. It is part of base instincts and it is the first action of the draw. The motions are also naturally defensive. Cuts are less likely to get stuck in the target, especially slicing cuts. However, cuts are inherently telegraphed to an extent.

Thrusting

Thrusting is more lethal (negating decapitation cuts) because it was (and still is) hard

er to mend than a cut. Thrusts are more likely to bypass thick clothing. Being in a straight line, thrusts are faster than cuts. They are also harder to defend from despite being mono-directional. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, many cavalry units preferred the thrust, from Napoleon to Patton; however, I disagree for one reason: wrist trauma, even if you roll the thrust as instructed by late manuals.

Physics

To put the debate to physics, this is one example. One person will use the same lunge (or pass) and use the same guard (best from quarte/inside or tierce/outside). The cut will be a wrist cut as seen in highland broadsword. There could be 2 methods in regards to the swords themselves. First, you could use a pallasch and a rapier of the same length and mass. Second, is to use the same combo sword such as an arming sword or backsword. As for the calculations, the thrust is purely linear an you should combine your mass with the sword's mass and measure distance from the tip (equal to your lunge or pass). For calculating cuts, use lunge or pass distance and treat the tip like a projectile in addition for distance. Most likely, cuts will include impulse.