Did the ancient two armies really order military commanders to fight one-on-one before the war?

There will be no one-on-one fighting between military commanders.

In the history of ancient wars, there were absurd jokes. During the Wanli period, Toyotomi Hideyoshi attacked Korea. Obviously, Japan pointed the finger at Liaodong Peninsula with obvious purpose. It wants to rely on North Korea to fulfill its wolf ambition of expanding China to East Asia. Facing the Japanese army, the Ming court dispatched Li to support the fighters. At that time, Japanese generals were keen on China culture and were familiar with the Three Kingdoms, thinking that there was not much difference in the use of troops between the Ming Dynasty and the Three Kingdoms. So the Japanese general was stupid enough to come to the front and shout and invite the Ming army to fight with him.

Speaking of it, one-on-one combat is simply a fantasy for the generals of the Ming dynasty. I don't know what kind of nerves there are. The commander of the Ming army didn't intend to take a reason, and ordered the indiscriminate shooting to beat the Japanese generals into a hornet's nest. The Japanese didn't expect that the army in front of them was like this? No martial arts? . Whether it is true or not, we can see the influence of folk romance on later war strategies. Many romance novels, including the Three Kingdoms, have scenes in which military commanders fight one-on-one: the two armies confront each other and open their postures. Later, the military commanders of both sides stepped forward, rode horses and held spears, and then shouted: Come and become famous, don't cut the nameless.

Even if the military commander enters the enemy's range, both sides will not make a move. With the announcement of the name, war is imminent. One-on-one results, either one party is beheaded or several rounds are divided, which is also a protracted war. Interestingly, if one side dies in a single challenge, his soldiers will surrender and will not resist. One-on-one combat determines the outcome of the war. The Lord will lose and the whole situation will lose. Although the fighting in the novel is wonderful, the soldiers on both sides have become useless furnishings, with no other use except cheering. Similar bridges are common, but not practical.

In real history, most wars are not decided by the victory or defeat of the Lord. What's the use of conscription? Cheer for fun? Some people speculate that in the real battlefield, military commanders will not appear one-on-one, which is the idea of novelists.