Minuteman vs Medieval foot soldier

[Spook of the lost]

@ Kyng that being the case, it'll be more like a like vs like battle, and I think the footman has the advantage here because he should have more reach than the bayonet.

[JHG]

True good point.
I guess this means that to my knowledge, there's not one fight where a pre-gunpowder warrior beats an early gunpowder warrior. Except maybe Arab warrior vs Scottish Highlander but the Arabs had guns too.

I think there probably would be some. For example, an expert longbowman could certainly compete with many early gunpowder warriors (including the Minuteman). However, the generic Medieval foot soldier wouldn't have been an expert longbowman (and I don't expect the specific soldier depicted in the opening post would be an expert longbowman either, since he isn't even armed with a longbow!)

Those early gunpowder weapons weren't 'better' than bows because they were deadlier (they weren't). They were better because it took years to train a longbowman, but only weeks to train a musketeer.

That’s why Native Americans like the Iroquois adopted muskets. 
A Medieval foot soldier would need to charge in for close quarters to have a chance but if he made it, the Minuteman would have to deal with an opponent in armor. And three guesses on how a knight would’ve fared.