OT: Lion VS. Tiger (1 on 1 Fight !!!! Videos)

[Pyro]

Who do you think will win ??


Lion VS. Tiger Clips:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?p=593CABFDF2F4684F&index=0&feature=PlayList&v=v1kQczDSOi4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGXtLI9X5m8&feature=PlayList&p=593CABFDF2F4684F&index=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYxdrxavd2g&feature=PlayList&p=124502A02769896B&index=40

[SsKSpurs21]

lions and tigers and bears, oh my!

[deion2123]

A healthy tiger would own a healthy lion every single time

[Pyro]

A healthy tiger would own a healthy lion every single time
i agree

[Y2Gezee]

A healthy tiger would own a healthy lion every single time

Disagree

[Pyro]

Disagree
why is that

[HardBodyThug]

why is that
Because the lion is at the top of the food chain for a reason. The derivative nickname "king of the jungle' is all the more worthy when you take into consideration the female lion prowess and hunting skills in conjunction with the Fabio-like mane of the male lion and it's brute strength.

Basically....lion > tiger.

[RedBlackAttack]

According to Yahoo! Answers... a Lion:


The lion would win. The lion and the tiger are almost evenly matched in cunning, hunting skills and speed, however, the lion has the advantage of more muscle strength and thereby more stamina. As the fight will get stretched, the scales will tip in favor of the lion. This is the basic rule of one-to-one combat - that the longer the battle extends, the factor of physical strength becomes more and more decisive. So clearly, here, lion has the advantage.

In one of the programs on Discovery, a similar research was carried out in which the strengths and weakness of both these predators were matched. They made out models of them and calculated the force applied and all other factors in various consitions. The lion came on tops.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006032116281

Since this topic came up, I did extensive research and found some interesting, well-researched studies on this very topic. Every one of them came to the conclusion that a lion, on average, would defeat a tiger if they were engaged in a life and death situation.

Here is a good website that breaks it down very thoroughly:
http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict.html

One thing that surprised me was the huge size advantage that an adult male lion has over an adult male tiger. Male lions are absolutely gigantic.

http://www.birdsasart.com/African%20Lion.jpg

[Solid Snake]

Without knowing any of the scientific facts, I would've first said a tiger, just seemed like he could slice up a lion like Wolverine or something.



Just in general, I just wonder what an animal's defenses are to getting sliced and diced? Like if a bear were pitted against a tiger, I know it's not as simple as a tiger going and slicing him up with his claws, but what's to prevent that??? How do animals defend that? Is it as simple as keeping distance or what.

[RedBlackAttack]

Without knowing any of the scientific facts, I would've first said a tiger, just seemed like he could slice up a lion like Wolverine or something.



Just in general, I just wonder what an animal's defenses are to getting sliced and diced? Like if a bear were pitted against a tiger, I know it's not as simple as a tiger going and slicing him up with his claws, but what's to prevent that??? How do animals defend that? Is it as simple as keeping distance or what.
From everything I have read, a grizzly or polar bear would easily kill lions or tigers.

Actually, in ancient days, they would pit these animals against each other for entertainment. It is my understanding that the bear is the most ruthless of all.

[Y2Gezee]

One major thing going in the favor of a lion aside from its strength and stamina is the fact that a lion will absolutely fight to the death. Well a male lion will. A Tiger will retreat if its had enough.

A tiger has more agility, but all things pretty much equal the lion wins.

But by all things equal, if you just find any tiger and any lion and put them together its not fair. You have to take into context the size of each, just as in a boxing match its not fair to put a heavyweight on a lightweight

[tenzan]

to bad both of these species will be extinct very soon

The lion population has gone from around 100k in the 90s to about 20k now.

Tigers have it even worse with less then 2500

[WoGiTaLiA1]

I know the Tiger is bigger than a Lion, dont know if they are stronger or not. Also depends on the breed of tiger. Siberian are much stronger than a couple of the other breeds.

[Y2Gezee]

I know the Tiger is bigger than a Lion, dont know if they are stronger or not. Also depends on the breed of tiger. Siberian are much stronger than a couple of the other breeds.


yeah Tigers appear bigger in weight, but a lot of that has to do with the way they eat. They eat a lot and store food, not sharing with the pride like Lions. Especially Siberian Tigers, they eat a lot to stay warm.

And for the people saying a Lions main is a weakness (don't know if you were serious or not) its also a defensive mechanism from being gripped around the neck, which is generally how these types of animals kill.

[gb8]

All three links are top draw great job.:cheers:

[Loki]

One thing that surprised me was the huge size advantage that an adult male lion has over an adult male tiger. Male lions are absolutely gigantic.


I'm pretty sure that male lions are nowhere near as large as, say, Bengal tigers, but I could be mistaken.

EDIT: According to Wikipedia, the lion is the second largest feline species after the tiger. So tigers are bigger on average.

[joshk]

When I saw this I thought Tiger Woods got in a fight with John Daly.

[ACCBaller1403]

The real issue here is how they live and hunt. Tigers are solitary creatures, and as such, have to kill animals using a combination of speed, power, and agility. Male lions have the lionesses to hunt for them, so they are built purely for power in order to defend the pride. Male lions forced to hunt for themselves more often then not end up starving.

So tigers are the better hunters, I don't think anyone would disagree there. But in terms of fighting, lions have a distinct advantage of larger forearms and heads. Larger front paws and muscular structure equals more powerful swings and larger heads means they can get their jaws around bigger prey. Tigers have stronger hind legs due to their need for explosive acceleration hunting prey. That doesn't necessarily help in a fight though.

Also, as mentioned previously, the adult mail lion has a mane protecting its aorta and wind pipe, the main targets of an adult tiger strike. Tigers rarely overpower their prey, but suffocate them instead by grasping onto the windpipe. Having the mane in place, a tiger's main weapon of death is taken away by providing a harder area to get a grip.

In expansive, wide open areas (like a cage or a zoo paddock) I think, all things being equal (age, weight, size) a lion wins. In a wooded area where agility means more, a tiger would likely win. Male lions, being large and bulky just wouldn't fare as well in most of the wooded areas where tigers call home.

And yes, a grizzly would take both lions and tigers. Too much size, thick skin, and massive claws and paws would just crush the cat.

Summary: Tigers are the best hunters. Lions are tailor made for one on one fights. Large bears dominate due to size.

I think in most cases in nature, size will win out.

[gb8]

Slighty OT but related nonetheless, how would a sabre tooth tiger fare against a modern lion?

[DAXX]

3 video is probably the best one. Brings excitement and just unbores you. Much deeper than the other 2.

[SuperboyXX0018]

The tigers won!

[ACCBaller1403]

Slighty OT but related nonetheless, how would a sabre tooth tiger fare against a modern lion?

Obviously, we'll never know, but I would put my money on the sabre tooth. The smilodon is one of the larger versions of the sabre tooth cats and is just so much bulkier and muscle bound than modern day lions. The large teeth would actually be a nuisance in a fight though, since they weren't used to attack. They were too large and brittle and in a fight, if they tried to use those teeth, they'd most likely snap and break. The teeth were exclusively used as a assassin like killing dagger.

Once the sabre tooth subdued it's prey with its size and weight, it would position the teeth and plunge them in on either side of the prey animal's neck, likely slicing through the carotid artery in the process, killing the animal. This is all theory of course based on the prey available at the time, placement of the teeth in the mouth of the cat, and fossil records.

Another thing that would work in the modern lion's favor is that sabre tooth cats were so built for power, that their endurance was extremely poor. If a fight raged for a while, the sabre tooth would tire before the modern lion.

1 on 1 though, I don't think the fight would last long enough for the sabre tooth to tire. It's size and power would be too much for the lion.

[knicks15]

havent lions and tigers fought before? why is everything hypothetical?

[ACCBaller1403]

havent lions and tigers fought before? why is everything hypothetical?

They don't live in the same environments and would only possibly meet in one small area of asia. They've been fought as sport before but it's illegal now and it really depends on if you're fighting male or female, size, which type of lion and tiger, etc. Too many variables to say "A lion would definately win" or vice versa.

[ACCBaller1403]

This is the most I've posted in a long time. Great topic.

[B-Low]

See everyone keeps saying the Lion would win based on this and that, but every video i've ever seen has shown the Tiger winning.

[gb8]

Obviously, we'll never know, but I would put my money on the sabre tooth. The smilodon is one of the larger versions of the sabre tooth cats and is just so much bulkier and muscle bound than modern day lions. The large teeth would actually be a nuisance in a fight though, since they weren't used to attack. They were too large and brittle and in a fight, if they tried to use those teeth, they'd most likely snap and break. The teeth were exclusively used as a assassin like killing dagger.

Once the sabre tooth subdued it's prey with its size and weight, it would position the teeth and plunge them in on either side of the prey animal's neck, likely slicing through the carotid artery in the process, killing the animal. This is all theory of course based on the prey available at the time, placement of the teeth in the mouth of the cat, and fossil records.

Another thing that would work in the modern lion's favor is that sabre tooth cats were so built for power, that their endurance was extremely poor. If a fight raged for a while, the sabre tooth would tire before the modern lion.

1 on 1 though, I don't think the fight would last long enough for the sabre tooth to tire. It's size and power would be too much for the lion.

You like Ish's very own dvid attenborough.

[ACCBaller1403]

You like Ish's very own dvid attenborough.

Ha. Watch Discovery Channel and Animal Planet. It has all you need to know.

[VeeCee15]

Tiger has a bigger build than lion. Siberian tigers have more
mass and have a longer body.

TIGER FTW

[GOBB]

Why would anyone say a Tiger? Guess you never been to the Zoo. Watched the National Geographic Channel? A Lion is HUGE, bigger than a Tiger and as pointed out STRONGER. You dont get labelled King of the Jungle for nothing. You dont see movies made of Lions and not Tigers. Both are intimidating animals but a Lion should scare, concern you moreso by the side of its head. The teeth, the stare, the mane...its just ridiculous in size. It would bytch slap your head off your soldiers. I dont care to see lions and tigers fight. So screw those vids.

[Nero]

The most important thing is that lions spend their entire young adulthood and many years later as well training to fight. They go off as solitary lions where they spar for years until ready to challenge a team that lords over a pride. Then they spend the remaining years fighting challengers until they finally succumb. A tiger is solitary and rarely fights, thus never develops the skills. Even if the physical traits for a one on one fight were equal (they're not) the lion would still pwn because of its training. Basically you have a pro fighter v. a pro hunter. Completely unfair!

[GOBB]

The most important thing is that lions spend their entire young adulthood and many years later as well training to fight. They go off as solitary lions where they spar for years until ready to challenge a team that lords over a pride. Then they spend the remaining years fighting challengers until they finally succumb. A tiger is solitary and rarely fights, thus never develops the skills. Even if the physical traits for a one on one fight were equal (they're not) the lion would still pwn because of its training. Basically you have a pro fighter v. a pro hunter. Completely unfair!

Exactly!

Where is Jerm at? These are his mofo pets! Someone signal Jerm. nevermind I'll do it...

*tosses bag of DUNG in the air*

:lol:

[Nero]

Obviously, we'll never know, but I would put my money on the sabre tooth. The smilodon is one of the larger versions of the sabre tooth cats and is just so much bulkier and muscle bound than modern day lions. The large teeth would actually be a nuisance in a fight though, since they weren't used to attack. They were too large and brittle and in a fight, if they tried to use those teeth, they'd most likely snap and break. The teeth were exclusively used as a assassin like killing dagger.

Once the sabre tooth subdued it's prey with its size and weight, it would position the teeth and plunge them in on either side of the prey animal's neck, likely slicing through the carotid artery in the process, killing the animal. This is all theory of course based on the prey available at the time, placement of the teeth in the mouth of the cat, and fossil records.

Another thing that would work in the modern lion's favor is that sabre tooth cats were so built for power, that their endurance was extremely poor. If a fight raged for a while, the sabre tooth would tire before the modern lion.

1 on 1 though, I don't think the fight would last long enough for the sabre tooth to tire. It's size and power would be too much for the lion.

Hmm, I don't know about that. How can you tell what a sabre's stamina was by it's anatomy?

[B-Low]

The most important thing is that lions spend their entire young adulthood and many years later as well training to fight. They go off as solitary lions where they spar for years until ready to challenge a team that lords over a pride. Then they spend the remaining years fighting challengers until they finally succumb. A tiger is solitary and rarely fights, thus never develops the skills. Even if the physical traits for a one on one fight were equal (they're not) the lion would still pwn because of its training. Basically you have a pro fighter v. a pro hunter. Completely unfair!

That is a really really good point. Never looked at it like that. :applause:

[Mean Joe Bean]

Tigers are a lot slower than lions and are not as good at hunting prey. Lions (lionesses in particlar) just seem like better athletes..

[ACCBaller1403]

Hmm, I don't know about that. How can you tell what a sabre's stamina was by it's anatomy?

Muscle structure. By looking at fossils they can see where muscles were attached. From that, they can tell if muscules were slow twitch or fast twitch. Sabres had monstrous muscle structures in the front of the bodies (like lions today) but little in the back. They were "top-heavy" so to speak. Quick and powerful in short bursts but over long distances, they tired quick.

Look at distance runners and fast creatures in nature now days. The fastest and longest running creatures are usually the skinniest and sleakest built. Sprinters tend to be well built and specialize over short distances. Pit a sprinter against a skinny distance runner and have them run 2 miles though. The sprinter will slow after a mile or so.

Thus, lions today are quick in short bursts but tire quicker than tigers, which tend to have bigger muscles in their hind legs rather than the front. Sabres were built like lions with even more power up front. QED, sabres have the same endurance issues lions have.

[RedBlackAttack]

I'm pretty sure that male lions are nowhere near as large as, say, Bengal tigers, but I could be mistaken.

EDIT: According to Wikipedia, the lion is the second largest feline species after the tiger. So tigers are bigger on average.
hmmm... I drew my conclusions from pictures that I had seen like these ones...

http://www.gothamist.com/images/2003_7_liontigermate.jpg

http://animals.timduru.org/dirlist/lions/TigerNLion-detrock1.jpg

http://www.ananova.com/images/web/383683.jpg

Whoops... don't know how that last one got on there. :confusedshrug:

[Nero]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger

Best of both worlds?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Bertramliger.jpg

[B-Low]

RBA's last pic is the origin of the Liger lol

[Nero]

Actually the lion is the male for the liger. If the tiger is male it's a tigon.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/Tigon16.jpg

The largest non-obese Liger, known as Hercules, is said to weigh over 544kg (1200 lb), [7] over twice the size of a male lion

holy crap!

[GOBB]

Actually the lion is the male for the liger. If the tiger is male it's a tigon.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/Tigon16.jpg

The largest non-obese Liger, known as Hercules, is said to weigh over 544kg (1200 lb), [7] over twice the size of a male lion

holy crap!

Non obese :oldlol:

1200lbs!!! Imagine that thing pouncing on you...it can literally carry you in its teeth by your shirt. You lookin like a biiitch ass cub. Thats scary.

Who was that magician who got owned? His pet tiger (siberian i believe) turned on him. Whatever happened to them.

[B-Low]

Non obese :oldlol:

1200lbs!!! Imagine that thing pouncing on you...it can literally carry you in its teeth by your shirt. You lookin like a biiitch ass cub. Thats scary.

Who was that magician who got owned? His pet tiger (siberian i believe) turned on him. Whatever happened to them.


http://www.rd.com/images/rdmag/people/27650SiegfriedRoy.jpg

http://www.rd.com/content/siegfried-and-roy-tiger-attack/

That was Roy. Crazy thing is the Tiger in that pic is only 380 pounds and look how big he is. I cant even imagine a 1200 pound one

[RedBlackAttack]

Non obese :oldlol:

1200lbs!!! Imagine that thing pouncing on you...it can literally carry you in its teeth by your shirt. You lookin like a biiitch ass cub. Thats scary.

Who was that magician who got owned? His pet tiger (siberian i believe) turned on him. Whatever happened to them.
That would be Roy Horn of the Siegfried & Roy ghey Vegas show.

[B-Low]

This is basically what happened....

http://www.papeandchandler.com/images/tigger.gif

[RedBlackAttack]

This is basically what happened....

http://www.papeandchandler.com/images/tigger.gif
:oldlol:

Their outfits are even funnier than the photoshopped tiger.

[GOBB]

Damn is dude handicapped or he still doing shows? Is the Tiger alive?

[RedBlackAttack]

Damn is dude handicapped or he still doing shows? Is the Tiger alive?

On October 3, 2003, during a show at The Mirage, Roy Horn was bitten on the shoulder by a seven-year-old male tiger named Montecore. Crew members separated Horn from the tiger and rushed him to the only Level I trauma center in Nevada, University Medical Center. Horn was critically injured and sustained severe blood loss. While being taken to the hospital, Horn said, according to sources, "Don't harm the cat."[2]

Horn was listed in critical condition for several weeks thereafter, and was said to have suffered a stroke and partial paralysis. Doctors removed one-quarter of his skull to relieve the pressure of his swelling brain during an operation known as a decompressive craniectomy. The portion of skull was placed in a pouch in Horn's abdomen in the hope of replacing it later.

Horn was eventually transferred to UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, California for long-term recovery and rehabilitation. As of 2006, Horn is walking, assisted only by Fischbacher, and talking.

It is disputed whether or not the tiger attacked Horn. Montecore had been trained by Horn since he was a cub; he had performed with the act for six years. Fischbacher, appearing on the Larry King interview program, said Horn fell during the act and Montecore was attempting to drag him to safety, as a mother tigress would pull one of her cubs by the neck. Fischbacher said Montecore had no way of knowing that Horn, unlike a tiger cub, did not have fur and thick skin covering his neck and that his neck was vulnerable to injury. Fischbacher said if Montecore had wanted to injure Horn, the tiger would have snapped his neck and shaken him back and forth.

Former Mirage owner Steve Wynn (who hired the duo in 1990) told Las Vegas television station KLAS-TV the events were substantially as described by Fischbacher. According to Wynn, there was a woman with a "big hairdo" in the front row who, he says, "fascinated and distracted" Montecore. The woman reached out to attempt to pet the animal, and Roy jumped between the woman and the tiger.

According to Wynn, the tiger gently grabbed Horn's right arm with his jaws, not scratching the arm or tearing his costume. Horn said, "Release, release", attempting to persuade Montecore to let go of his arm, and eventually striking the tiger with his microphone. Horn tripped over the cat's paw and fell on his back; stagehands then rushed out and jumped on the cat. It was only then, said Wynn, that the confused tiger leaned over Roy and attempted to carry Horn off the stage to safety. Wynn said that although the tiger's teeth inflicted puncture wounds that caused Horn to lose blood, there was no damage to his neck. Stagehands then sprayed Roy and Montecore with a fire extinguisher to separate the two.
A white tiger in the Mirage habitat.

Montecore was put into quarantine for ten days in order to ensure he was not rabid, and was then returned to his habitat at The Mirage. While Horn has requested that Montecore not be harmed, the incident may augur the end of exotic animal shows in which there are no barriers between tigers and audience members. Some animal rights activists, many of whom oppose the use of wild animals in live entertainment, sought to use the incident as a springboard for publicity, though few have ever accused the Siegfried & Roy show of mistreating animals.

The injury to Roy Horn prompted The Mirage to close the show indefinitely and to lay off 267 cast and crew members with one week's severance pay. While Fischbacher has said "the show will go on", a hotel spokesman told the production staff that they "should explore other career opportunities".

According to the Las Vegas Advisor, The Mirage will suffer financially, not just from the loss of $45 million in annual ticket sales, but from having to forgo untold millions in sales of food, beverages, hotel rooms and the casino's gambling winnings. An MGM Mirage spokesman said losing Siegfried & Roy is a bigger hit to the Mirage brand than to its finances, because the entertainers are "practically the faces" of the hotel, and finding a new hotel brand or identity will be difficult to do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegfried_&_Roy

[Pyro]

Why would anyone say a Tiger? Guess you never been to the Zoo. Watched the National Geographic Channel? A Lion is HUGE, bigger than a Tiger and as pointed out STRONGER. You dont get labelled King of the Jungle for nothing. You dont see movies made of Lions and not Tigers. Both are intimidating animals but a Lion should scare, concern you moreso by the side of its head. The teeth, the stare, the mane...its just ridiculous in size. It would bytch slap your head off your soldiers. I dont care to see lions and tigers fight. So screw those vids.

That statment you made that i put in bold is 100% wrong its actually the opposite
Tigers are known to be bigger and heavier and most likley stronger than lions

But lions are better fighters

Male Lions weigh from 330–500 lb and are around 4ft to 7 and 1/2 feet
Male Tigers weigh from 440 and 700 lb and are around 8 ft 6 in to 10 ft 8 in

Now get your facts straight

[RedBlackAttack]

That statment you made that i put in bold is 100% wrong its actually the opposite

Tigers are known to be bigger and hevier and most likley stronger than lions

But lions are better fighters
Plus, the large mane that lions have serve as protection against attacks to the neck.

Basically, lions > tigers

[Pyro]

Plus, the large mane that lions have serve as protection against attacks to the neck.

Basically, lions > tigers
that is also 100% wrong

those large manes dont serve any protection at all it is actually used to attract females and the condition of the lion based on the color
those manes are nothing but thin hair

[DeuceWallaces]

A Male Lion has been naturally selected over 1000's of years to fight and win 1v1 battle against other males. I think they would have the clear advantage in a brawl as it's in their nature.

I think a full grown coastal Grizzly Bear (1200-1500 pounds) and a 8-10' standing height could defend itself against most any terrestrial animal in the world with the exception of an Elephant but based on what I know of Elephants that confrontation would be unlikely.

Others to consider would be a Dominant Hippo, or freak Crocodile but prolly not yoru average croc. Silverback Gorilla is prolly up there too.

[Y2Gezee]

that is also 100% wrong

those large manes dont serve any protection at all it is actually used to attract females
those manes are nothing but thin hair


Wrong manes also help to keep Male lions alive from when they fight with other male lions for Prides.

And again while Tigers are bigger, its mostly fat, not muscle. Specifically the Siberian tiger as the extra fat protects it from the cold.

[ACCBaller1403]

that is also 100% wrong

those large manes dont serve any protection at all it is actually used to attract females
those manes are nothing but thin hair

They don't serve as anything in their day to day lives other than to attract females, but when pit against an animal who's main form of attack is to bite around the neck, having a thick patch of hair covering that spot is definately helpful. Nothing in the lion's environment would attack a lion around the neck so it's merely a coincidence that this would help them out in a tiger attack but it would be beneficial nonetheless.

[RedBlackAttack]

that is also 100% wrong

those large manes dont serve any protection at all it is actually used to attract females and the condition of the lion based on the color
those manes are nothing but thin hair
Hmmm... I guess you are right.

[QUOTE]The lion

[Pyro]

They don't serve as anything in their day to day lives other than to attract females, but when pit against an animal who's main form of attack is to bite around the neck, having a thick patch of hair covering that spot is definately helpful. Nothing in the lion's environment would attack a lion around the neck so it's merely a coincidence that this would help them out in a tiger attack but it would be beneficial nonetheless.
Wrong again

A lions mane was scientifically proven to have no protection whatsoever for the neck

Those patches of hair is nothing but like the hair on your head
Now does the hair on your head protect your skull in anyway ??

[Pyro]

Hmmm... I guess you are right.


http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s656758.htm

:confusedshrug:
thank you for providing the source for me :cheers:

I know my predators

[i seen hippos]

A Male Lion has been naturally selected over 1000's of years to fight and win 1v1 battle against other males. I think they would have the clear advantage in a brawl as it's in their nature.

I think a full grown coastal Grizzly Bear (1200-1500 pounds) and a 8-10' standing height could defend itself against most any terrestrial animal in the world with the exception of an Elephant but based on what I know of Elephants that confrontation would be unlikely.

Others to consider would be a Dominant Hippo, or freak Crocodile but prolly not yoru average croc. Silverback Gorilla is prolly up there too.

Saw a vid yesterday of a pack of lions take down an elephant. Looked like Jurassic Park when the raptors jump on the t-rex.:roll:

I looked this all up yesterday and basically if you take the best fighters from each species of bears (grizzly), tigers (bengal) and lions (African) they'd rank like this:

1. Grizzly (crush the skull of anything in one swipe)

2. tigers and lions tie. Accounts of both killing the other. Like someone said, you can find more vids of tigers scaring off lions (not actually beating it), but there's more literature of lions dominating tigers.

[Loki]

Why would anyone say a Tiger? Guess you never been to the Zoo. Watched the National Geographic Channel? A Lion is HUGE, bigger than a Tiger and as pointed out STRONGER.

Tigers are bigger than lions, dude.

[Pyro]

Saw a vid yesterday of a pack of lions take down an elephant. Looked like Jurassic Park when the raptors jump on the t-rex.:roll:

I looked this all up yesterday and basically if you take the best fighters from each species of bears (grizzly), tigers (bengal) and lions (African) they'd rank like this:

1. Grizzly (crush the skull of anything in one swipe)

2. tigers and lions tie. Accounts of both killing the other. Like someone said, you can find more vids of tigers scaring off lions (not actually beating it), but there's more literature of lions dominating tigers.
Try searching the vids on youtube most of the tigers pretty much beat down the lions in a fight

[i seen hippos]

Try searching the vids on youtube most of the tigers pretty much beat down rthe lions in a fight

That's what I said. But first hand accounts tell a different story for the most part.

[Loki]

A pic of a liger (lion/tiger hybrid):


http://www.maniacworld.com/liger.jpg

[RedBlackAttack]

One thing is for sure... lions AND tigers are both lucky that there are no grizzly or polar bears in Africa.

The bear is one badass animal. THE most badass land animal, in fact.

You have to go to a great white shark or orca to find its equal on earth.

[Pyro]

That's what I said. But first hand accounts tell a different story for the most part.
well not many people had a first hand accounts

maybe back in the 1930's people would actually bet on these fights and see them take place when it was legal but for sure not today

[Nero]

That's what I said. But first hand accounts tell a different story for the most part.

Maybe the lions choke in front of the camera?

[GOBB]

A Grizzly Bear definately would be the top dawg. Especially that one that off'ed those retards who spend thier lives living with them. Until one was on some h8-tful stuff and owned them. The Bear documentary. Think it was filmed on the other side of the moutain where Brokeback was filmed. :roll:

[QUOTE=Pyro]That statment you made that i put in bold is 100% wrong its actually the opposite
Tigers are known to be bigger and heavier and most likley stronger than lions

But lions are better fighters

Male Lions weigh from 330

[Pyro]

One thing is for sure... lions AND tigers are both lucky that there are no grizzly or polar bears in Africa.

The bear is one badass animal. THE most badass land animal, in fact.

You have to go to a great white shark or orca to find its equal on earth.
how about Silverback gorilla VS. Grizzly bear or polar bear

[i seen hippos]

well not many people had a first hand accounts

maybe back in the 1930's people would actually bet on these fights and see them take place when it was legal but for sure not today

There are accounts much later. Not illegal in many Asian countries till 60's and 70's.

People still alive have seen countless fights between the two.

[GOBB]

A pic of a liger (lion/tiger hybrid):


http://www.maniacworld.com/liger.jpg

Obese! :roll:

[i seen hippos]

how about Silverback gorilla VS. Grizzly bear or polar bear

Grizzly beats everything. One swipe and you're chest is caved in or your head is crushed literally. You have to be very lucky to walk away from a grizzly swipe. Plus, what could the gorilla do to really hurt the bear. Punch it?:oldlol:

[i seen hippos]

A pic of a liger (lion/tiger hybrid):


http://www.maniacworld.com/liger.jpg

I assume they're too sluggish to fight well.

[GOBB]

how about Silverback gorilla VS. Grizzly bear or polar bear

Depends on the enviroment you put them in. Whose backyard?

[GOBB]

Grizzly beats everything. One swipe and you're chest is caved in or your head is crushed literally. You have to be very lucky to walk away from a grizzly swipe. Plus, what could the gorilla do to really hurt the bear. Punch it?:oldlol:

Silverbacks are agressive as hell. Maybe pull off the upset? G.S Silverbacks vs Dallas Grizzlies. Pwned!

[Pyro]

A Grizzly Bear definately would be the top dawg. Especially that one that off'ed those retards who spend thier lives living with them. Until one was on some h8-tful stuff and owned them. The Bear documentary. Think it was filmed on the other side of the moutain where Brokeback was filmed. :roll:



Hey a Zoologist everyone! The funny yet sad part is while you may be enlightening those ignorant to the animal kingdom. That'll be your calling here. Because talkin about basketball? You struggle. Talkin about OJ Mayo and other draft prospects be it this year, next year? You struggle (but laughable because some of the comparisons are hilarious). I used to think you were a worthless poster until you started being Croc Hunter jr. Good job.

I'll still take a Lion over a Tiger regardless of the size difference because as mentioned they spend thier lives rumbling.
I am not a Zoologist

I just have knowledge about something else besides bball
Just because I know about animals does not mean i am an expert at that field
It just means i am not a dumb fu#k that only knows about Basketball and has thier sad life revolve around it

I have never seen someone so dumb to actually bash someone for having more knowledge in a certain field than him

[i seen hippos]

I wish I could see a lion/tiger fight that started with them lunging full out at each other like this vid:

http://www.maniacworld.com/lion_vs_hunter.htm

Imagine them coming at each other like that? lol

[tenzan]

One thing is for sure... lions AND tigers are both lucky that there are no grizzly or polar bears in Africa.


I am sure Lions or Tigers would rather be hunted by large bears then poachers. As dangerous as large bears may be, they are not nearly the threat poachers have been in Africa and Asia.

[GOBB]

I am not a Zoologist

I just have knowledge about something else besides bball
Just because I know about animals does not mean i am an expert at that field
It just means i am not a dumb fu#k that only knows about Basketball and has thier sad life revolve around it

I have never seen someone so dumb to actually bash someone for having more knowledge in a certain field than him

Field? :roll: Bruh unless you have a career dont call knowing something a field. I can research information, get myself up to par and that doesnt make me claim it as a field. Basketball isnt my field...its a hobby. Something I enjoy watching and discussing. I dont earn from it. And the point is while you may know about some things in regards to the topic and where it has gone. You konw very little in basketball. And we havent even got to other sports, other things (subjects) to see how vast your knowledge stretches. I've never seen someone display such little knowlege about basketball like you. No I take that back I have...but when we think of you? It wont be basketball in general or even OJ Mayo who you belove. It would be you exposing who is the larger animal "Lion vs Tiger" and while you never seen first hand accounts of the two fighting you can surely point us to youtube.com for video footage. :rolleyes:

[ACCBaller1403]

Wrong again

A lions mane was scientifically proven to have no protection whatsoever for the neck

Those patches of hair is nothing but like the hair on your head
Now does the hair on your head protect your skull in anyway ??

Think about it. If you're trying to bite someone's neck and they have a large tuft of fur there (and if you're arguing that it's like hair on someone's head, show me someone who's hair is as thick and massive as a lion's mane) you're going to get a mouth full of fur.

I'm agreeing with you that it's all for show in their day to day lives. Nature never intended to have tigers and lions meet so it's merely a coincidence that it can offer some protection.

http://gs061.k12.sd.us/big%20beard.JPG

Try and bite this guy's neck and tell me his beard doesn't help.

[Y2Gezee]

Think about it. If you're trying to bite someone's neck and they have a large tuft of fur there (and if you're arguing that it's like hair on someone's head, show me someone who's hair is as thick and massive as a lion's mane) you're going to get a mouth full of fur.

I'm agreeing with you that it's all for show in their day to day lives. Nature never intended to have tigers and lions meet so it's merely a coincidence that it can offer some protection.

http://gs061.k12.sd.us/big%20beard.JPG

Try and bite this guy's neck and tell me his beard doesn't help.


Nature didn't intend for Lions to fight Tigers, but it did intend for them to fight other lions trying to take their pride or territory and other animals of the bush like Hyenas(sp?)

[ACCBaller1403]

Nature didn't intend for Lions to fight Tigers, but it did intend for them to fight other lions trying to take their pride or territory and other animals of the bush like Hyenas(sp?)

But lions use brute force to attack and don't bite for the neck like tigers do. Neither do hyenas. It's all pack hunting.

[Pyro]

Field? :roll: Bruh unless you have a career dont call knowing something a field. I can research information, get myself up to par and that doesnt make me claim it as a field. Basketball isnt my field...its a hobby. Something I enjoy watching and discussing. I dont earn from it. And the point is while you may know about some things in regards to the topic and where it has gone. You konw very little in basketball. And we havent even got to other sports, other things (subjects) to see how vast your knowledge stretches. I've never seen someone display such little knowlege about basketball like you. No I take that back I have...but when we think of you? It wont be basketball in general or even OJ Mayo who you belove. It would be you exposing who is the larger animal "Lion vs Tiger" and while you never seen first hand accounts of the two fighting you can surely point us to youtube.com for video footage. :rolleyes:
I am sorry i dont spend 70% of my life on this board and have a job and friends, something i doubt you have (this is not including "Internet friends")

I am so sorry i dont have 12000 posts and post 35 times a day, I have better things to with my life

How do you insult my knowledge of bball if you rarley see me post

Im out im going to my girlfriends house and hopefully get laid now
Yes i said girlfriend something you prob never dreamed of having

PEACE OUT
:roll: GOBB The Post Master:roll:

[Y2Gezee]

But lions use brute force to attack and don't bite for the neck like tigers do. Neither do hyenas. It's all pack hunting.

When they fight they attack the neck to attempt to kill. When a pack of lions hunt, they actually kill by going to the throat. There's no way you can argue that.

Hell look at the actual videos of the Lions fighting the Tigers they go for the neck too. Its how Big cats kill.

[GOBB]

I am sorry i dont spend 70% of my life on this board and have a job and friends

Where did you get 70%? From your ass? Dont tell me you caught the plague of talkin out of your ass. Shame, so early.

And most of us have jobs and friends offline. Contrary to popular belief.


I am so sorry i dont have 12000 posts and post 35 times a day, I have better things to with my life

So you went to my profile to look up dirt. :oldlol: I dont fill that out much. Sorry bruh. Maybe next time I will so you can have something to reply with? Then again I'd shoot that down like I've done your post so far.

Face it bruh what you're typing has been said countless times. Its like shyt talk 101 on msgboards. "Attack post count, say they dont have lives because they live on here. Oh then say they dont have a job or friends". The ole I'm assume you're insecure now watch me make you even more insecure rants dont work on me. Wanna know why? Thats my "field" here. :hammerhead:


How do you insult my knowledge of bball if you rarley see me post

I've seen you post. I wouldnt insult your knowledge for shyts sake.


Im out im going to my girlfriends house and hopefully get laid now
Yes i said girlfriend something you prob never dreamed of having

The classic "i'm logging off now, so i wont read/reply to you. My girlfriend is naked with her twaat tingling begging for a submission move. A ha, i have a girl and you dont. You're a (get ready this is a classic kids) LOSER! Peace"

:cry: Dont leave me here. Please dont....please o please! Come back. Friends? I'll give you access to my mypace page. Come on dude!

:rolleyes:


I'll leave some dung when you return. You can tell us what kind of diet the Lion has who dropped it.

[ACCBaller1403]

When they fight they attack the neck to attempt to kill. When a pack of lions hunt, they actually kill by going to the throat. There's no way you can argue that.

Hell look at the actual videos of the Lions fighting the Tigers they go for the neck too. Its how Big cats kill.

Look at when two male lions are fighting. They attack by rearing up on their hind legs and wailing on each other with their paws.

The females go for the neck when hunting but only after they mostly subdue the prey. As a pack, they can get multiple lionesses on the prey to hold it down before one goes for the kill.

Tigers don't have that luxery of a pack. They immediately go for the neck after knocking the animal down.


Lions evolved as fighters. Among the pride, their primary job is to protect their females from marauding males who would assume control of the pride and kill any cubs. As a result, the male lion spends the great majority of his time in combat situations. Nature has supported the lion in this, with the evolution of a thick heavy mane for added protection and to intimidate.

Moreover, in any fight with a tiger, the lion would have the backing of the entire pride, though it should be noted that pride defence is almost entirely the job of the male lion, and not often assisted by the lionesses.



*In the case of a lion killing another maned male many have learnt to attack beyond the mane, usually at the back of the front leg.

This happens particularly in southern areas where the lions have very thick manes. It is a purely learnt behaviour and the tiger would not know this technique, having never needed to use it.


http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict7.html

Again, it isn't the mane's intended use, but trying to bite through inches of hair is definately not easy. People may think it's "just hair" but try getting a comb through tangled hair. It's not easy.

[gts]

1700 pounds of bad mood... nothing is a match for this
http://www.sphoto.com/medium/kodiak_b_fulface_3288_471.jpg

[Y2Gezee]

Look at when two male lions are fighting. They attack by rearing up on their hind legs and wailing on each other with their paws.

The females go for the neck when hunting but only after they mostly subdue the prey. As a pack, they can get multiple lionesses on the prey to hold it down before one goes for the kill.

Like I said go watch some vids of Male lions fighting each other or these vids of fighting tigers, they go for the Neck too.

[ACCBaller1403]

Like I said go watch some vids of Male lions fighting each other or these vids of fighting tigers, they go for the Neck too.

I see a whole lot of the lions in the old time videos trying to maul the tiger. The tiger keeps trying to go low to get a hold on the underside of the neck. The lion is swinging with his paws.

[deion2123]

According to Yahoo! Answers... a Lion:


http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006032116281

Since this topic came up, I did extensive research and found some interesting, well-researched studies on this very topic. Every one of them came to the conclusion that a lion, on average, would defeat a tiger if they were engaged in a life and death situation.

Here is a good website that breaks it down very thoroughly:
http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict.html

One thing that surprised me was the huge size advantage that an adult male lion has over an adult male tiger. Male lions are absolutely gigantic.

http://www.birdsasart.com/African%20Lion.jpg

you got your facts wrong..tigers are bigger than lions...the biggest cat in the world is a Siberian tiger..can get up to 900lbs+ and over 13 feet long...and tigers are bigger and stronger than lions..a lion has no chance against a tiger

[deion2123]

One major thing going in the favor of a lion aside from its strength and stamina is the fact that a lion will absolutely fight to the death. Well a male lion will. A Tiger will retreat if its had enough.

A tiger has more agility, but all things pretty much equal the lion wins.

But by all things equal, if you just find any tiger and any lion and put them together its not fair. You have to take into context the size of each, just as in a boxing match its not fair to put a heavyweight on a lightweight
read up on tigers..your facts are completely wrong..tigers own lions in size and power

[deion2123]

Why would anyone say a Tiger? Guess you never been to the Zoo. Watched the National Geographic Channel? A Lion is HUGE, bigger than a Tiger and as pointed out STRONGER. You dont get labelled King of the Jungle for nothing. You dont see movies made of Lions and not Tigers. Both are intimidating animals but a Lion should scare, concern you moreso by the side of its head. The teeth, the stare, the mane...its just ridiculous in size. It would bytch slap your head off your soldiers. I dont care to see lions and tigers fight. So screw those vids.
you are completely wrong on all accounts...lions dont live in jungles tigers do...tigers are lot bigger than lions more than a few hundred pounds on average and are bigger and stronger...tigers are more athletic than lions..have the second highest vertical among mammals(over 16 feet high)..have stronger jaws on average...tigers > lions..watch the youtube videos..every single time the lions get owned by tigers and most of the time female tigers are the ones owning male lions

[B-Low]

Ok only one way to settle this i guess....


http://media.monstersandcritics.com/articles/1227546/article_images/thecrownsitsnoteasilyonprincejohnshead.jpg
http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/walt_disney/the_lion_king/mufasa2.jpg
http://phoenix.gov/POLICE/kidsc2b.jpg
http://www.bastards.org/images/scar.jpg


vs.

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/walt_disney/the_tigger_movie/tigger.jpg
https://customer4.mytrp.com/custom/kellogg63stage_portal/images/char_tony_interior.gif
http://www.animationartgallery.com/images/WDC/WDCHB14.jpg

[jbot]

you are completely wrong on all accounts...lions dont live in jungles tigers do...tigers are lot bigger than lions more than a few hundred pounds on average and are bigger and stronger...tigers are more athletic than lions..have the second highest vertical among mammals(over 16 feet high)..have stronger jaws on average...tigers > lions..watch the youtube videos..every single time the lions get owned by tigers and most of the time female tigers are the ones owning male lions

this is true. tigers are a bulkier cat than lions.

i would rather be a lion though if given the choice. lions are like pimps, kicking back while his females hunt for his food cause he gets first dibs anyway. then he gets to tap all those females cause he's got it like that. all he does is watch out for young cat pimps trying to take his pride over.

[West-Side]

A healthy tiger would own a healthy lion every single time

What? How old are you 12?
Are you kidding me? Lion would tear the living **** out of a Tiger any day and every day, there's a reason he's the king of the jungle.

The only animal on this planet I would fear more then a Lion is a Rock Spider...which weights about 20 pounds, and can jump 50 meters. Not only is he poisons but he can take your hand off with one bite...creapiest sh*t you will ever see on this planet, especially since this thing is like a rock...he doesn't move so you can never detect him, until he jumps on you.

[West-Side]

No wonder so many of you young cats are saying Tigers are stronger, those vidoes are showing some baby Lions fighting a grown ass Tiger.

Lions are a BIGGER species, and if you ever read about them...no animal on the planet messes with a Lion, he's the laziest animal on the planet...when he has food beside him, and he falls asleep...only animal that dare come and steal it are heinese (spelling)...and they usually come in groups of like 10, and if the Lion detects them he usually freaks on them.

In those videos the Tiger is clearly better which makes me wonder how old is the Lion, because on average Lions are the bigger species.

[B-Low]

lol Tigers ARE bigger. It's a fact. Even if you think lions would win tigers really are bigger animals.

edit: here lol

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22tigers+are+bigger+than+lions%22

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/kids/creature_feature/0012/tigers2.html

http://www.bigcatrescue.org/tiger.htm

lots of websites with information. All simply say TIGERS are the biggest species of cat on earth

[LakersDynasty]

Really enjoying this thread, great read. :bowdown:

Tigers are bigger than Lions, it's a fact. How can anyone dispute a fact? I think a Tiger would own a Lion most of the time.

[Pyro]

Really enjoying this thread, great read. :bowdown:

Tigers are bigger than Lions, it's a fact. How can anyone dispute a fact? I think a Tiger would own a Lion most of the time.
i agree

[LakersDynasty]

Polar Bear vs. Walrus (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ob_oD1IsYbE)

Tigress Owns Male Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=J0AVDVUoe5U)

Tiger vs. Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Noyswp7pwqw)

Tiger vs. Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=O3qVz4FcyWw)

I see the same results every time, the Tiger always comes out on top. It is far more vicious than a Lion, much more aggressive. And the Siberian Tiger is even stronger than the Bengal Tiger.

[West-Side]

According to recent study, scientists say that lions have the strongest forelegs of the big cats, and they have a knack to being more ferocious. Even though tigers are heavier and longer, it's ferocity that determines a winner. Scientists say that Siberian tigers may lack that in comparison to a lion. However, the lion's 'built for fighting' physique has turned him into a poor predator. The tiger has stronger hind legs, therefore making him faster and more agile. That would make a tiger more of a predator than a fighter.

I'd listen to the scientist before any of you...Tigers may be bigger species but that doesn't make them stronger...Bulldogs are smaller then Golden Retrievers...does that make them weaker?

Those videos are garbage, a MALE Lion...the one that LIVES in the JUNGLE, will MURDER a Tiger, I don't care what a ZOO Lion who looks like a baby does against a much larger Tiger. Lions are alot larger then the one in that video, I have done a research paper on Lions in university...they are the most ferocious animal in the world, no one messes with them because they know their wrath. I'm not saying Tigers are weak, because they are far from it...they are the monsters of Asia, Lions are the monsters of the Jungle...in a fight, I'd put my money on a grown ass male Lion any day of the week.

[GOBB]

Polar Bear vs. Walrus (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ob_oD1IsYbE)

Tigress Owns Male Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=J0AVDVUoe5U)

Tiger vs. Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Noyswp7pwqw)

Tiger vs. Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=O3qVz4FcyWw)

I see the same results every time, the Tiger always comes out on top. It is far more vicious than a Lion, much more aggressive. And the Siberian Tiger is even stronger than the Bengal Tiger.

Videos showed nothing. Try again.

[LakersDynasty]

Videos showed nothing. Try again.
Showed nothing? One of the Lions almost got killed. Post a video of a full grown Male Lion taking on a full grown Tiger and coming out on top, then we'll talk. So far we have about 5-6 videos with the Tiger winning every single time.

[GOBB]

Showed nothing? One of the Lions almost got killed. Post a video of a full grown Male Lion taking on a full grown Tiger and coming out on top, then we'll talk. So far we have about 5-6 videos with the Tiger winning every single time.

I saw nothing which you type besides NBA fights (posturing) and most were tigers ganging up on a Lion. I'll take the first hand accounts over you guys getting hard ons for 2min videos.

Only thing that got owned was the Walrus.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0GB8uo_Yuw

Run tell that...backyard style...no zoo captivity crap. Backyard style clown.

[LakersDynasty]

Gobb is in denial. Ganging up on the Lions? The tigers were outnumbered in most of the videos and were still the aggressors. Yeah you just stick with what people have told you and I'll go with the cold hard facts. :oldlol:

[i seen hippos]

Gobb is in denial. Ganging up on the Lions? The tigers were outnumbered in most of the videos and were still the aggressors. Yeah you just stick with what people have told you and I'll go with the cold hard facts. :oldlol:

What facts? Youtube vids?:roll:

Over first hand accounts from animal trainers?:confusedshrug:

[West-Side]

Uhmm one of those videos, I notice a Lion fighting a Tiger...and doing pretty good, the Lion then runs away because a SECOND Tiger attacks him?

Kinda lame, I noticed 1 Lion surrounded by 3 Tigers...and he was holding his own against the Tiger until another Tiger gets involved and the Lion runs away...I don't blame him. And I think Lions are a more beautfiul species anyways...they're pimps of the jungle, Tigers are jealous that their women don't do the hunting for them. :oldlol:

[deion2123]

According to recent study, scientists say that lions have the strongest forelegs of the big cats, and they have a knack to being more ferocious. Even though tigers are heavier and longer, it's ferocity that determines a winner. Scientists say that Siberian tigers may lack that in comparison to a lion. However, the lion's 'built for fighting' physique has turned him into a poor predator. The tiger has stronger hind legs, therefore making him faster and more agile. That would make a tiger more of a predator than a fighter.

I'd listen to the scientist before any of you...Tigers may be bigger species but that doesn't make them stronger...Bulldogs are smaller then Golden Retrievers...does that make them weaker?

Those videos are garbage, a MALE Lion...the one that LIVES in the JUNGLE, will MURDER a Tiger, I don't care what a ZOO Lion who looks like a baby does against a much larger Tiger. Lions are alot larger then the one in that video, I have done a research paper on Lions in university...they are the most ferocious animal in the world, no one messes with them because they know their wrath. I'm not saying Tigers are weak, because they are far from it...they are the monsters of Asia, Lions are the monsters of the Jungle...in a fight, I'd put my money on a grown ass male Lion any day of the week.

lions dont live in jungles dumbass..they live in Africa unless jungles magically somehow appreared there recently...tigers are bigger its a fact..google is your friend use it...tigers can jump higher than lions can...so how do stronger hindlegs factor into the equation ??... tigers kill individually bigger and more powerful prey than lions can ..

[deion2123]

What facts? Youtube vids?:roll:

Over first hand accounts from animal trainers?:confusedshrug:
your source is what because I have seen articles that say tigers own lions in fights..because guess what tigers are bigger and stronger... for example...lets say if a 120 lb guy who is more ferocious and a laid back 250 lb guy got in a fight..I could care less if the 120lb guy is more ferocious he is still getting his ass kicked because of the physical differences...same thing between a tiger and lion

[B-Low]

lol here's those deep jungles that lions live in. The live mostly on the serengeti man...king of the jungle is just a gimmick name

http://www.acm.edu/tanzania/serengeti-lg.jpg

[GOBB]

your source is what because I have seen articles that say tigers own lions in fights..because guess what tigers are bigger and stronger... for example...lets say if a 120 lb guy who is more ferocious and a laid back 250 lb guy got in a fight..I could care less if the 120lb guy is more ferocious he is still getting his ass kicked because of the physical differences...same thing between a tiger and lion

Wrong because its not about size. Its about the actual fight. If the 120lb knows how to fight and throw his hands he can drop that 250lb clown where he stands. Thats a fact especially if that 120lb packs power. Horrible example.

Care to try again perhaps? Maybe set variables for each fighter. You cant just leave it at physical size and think 250 wins out over 120. Its got to be MORE to the descriptions than weight and attitude.

[West-Side]

your source is what because I have seen articles that say tigers own lions in fights..

Show me one article clown, it's probably not an article you read it is an opinion of some idiot jsimilar to you. Scientists in many articles have claimed Lions are more powerful creatures and are more ferocious...Tigers got stronger hind legs, like I said just because they are larger in size doesn't mean they're stronger...Lions are more ferocious...Mike Tyson wasn't the biggest guy in the ring, but he was the most ferocious.

[i seen hippos]

Wrong because its not about size. Its about the actual fight. If the 120lb knows how to fight and throw his hands he can drop that 250lb clown where he stands. Thats a fact especially if that 120lb packs power. Horrible example.

Care to try again perhaps? Maybe set variables for each fighter. You cant just leave it at physical size and think 250 wins out over 120. Its got to be MORE to the descriptions than weight and attitude.

Tigers are also not two times the size of lions.:roll:

You can find countless articles of lions severely hurting or killing tigers. I will say this one more time, there is no evidence that says either animal has dominated the other.

There are so many accounts of both sides winning that anyone who says one side is cleary more dominant is a fool. But you idiots can base your opinions all on youtube if you want.

[deion2123]

Tigers are also not two times the size of lions.:roll:

You can find countless articles of lions severely hurting or killing tigers. I will say this one more time, there is no evidence that says either animal has dominated the other.

There are so many accounts of both sides winning that anyone who says one side is cleary more dominant is a fool. But you idiots can base your opinions all on youtube if you want.
they aren't twice the size but can weigh a couple of hundred pounds more..which is a huge advantage...common sense says tigers win more ..they are bigger and have the same abilities if not more than lions....

[deion2123]

Show me one article clown, it's probably not an article you read it is an opinion of some idiot jsimilar to you. Scientists in many articles have claimed Lions are more powerful creatures and are more ferocious...Tigers got stronger hind legs, like I said just because they are larger in size doesn't mean they're stronger...Lions are more ferocious...Mike Tyson wasn't the biggest guy in the ring, but he was the most ferocious.
you make 0 sense buddy...tigers weigh more because they have more muscle and bone...lions are more ferocious based on what ?? tigers individually can kill prey that lions have no chance against

[B-Low]

Just wanna say that this thread is a testament to the difference between putting an OT thread in the main forum and putting it in the off the court forum.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=42800

Pyro made this exact same thread in the off the court lounge BEFORE this one and it got 6 replies. He posted the exact same thing in the main forum and it got over 100

[i seen hippos]

they aren't twice the size but can weigh a couple of hundred pounds more..which is a huge advantage...common sense says tigers win more ..they are bigger and have the same abilities if not more than lions....

What you think is common sense doesn't matter.

[deion2123]

there is a vid on youtube of a tiger killing a huge croc...lions dont kill crocs..because they dont have a chance

[i seen hippos]

there is a vid on youtube of a tiger killing a huge croc...lions dont kill crocs..because they dont have a chance

What? Tigers learned how to kill crocs by experience, not because they have some superior inate ability to do so.:roll:

[B-Low]

Honestly I'm realzing this whole Tiger vs. Lion argument isn't gonna get anywhere because there's no proof. Like Hippos said there's no evidence of either one having a 100% advantage

I mean when you look at it its like asking "who would win in a fight, a black guy or a hispanic guy?"

It depends on the size, the upbringing, the fighting ability, speed. It basically depends on the individual and what they're capable of. Trying to decide which would win between two even species is impossible and this thread will just keep going back and forth. One tiger may beat a lion, but then the next day that same tiger could turn around and lose to another lion. Just like with people, it all depends on the individual

[LakersDynasty]

Female Tiger kills Male Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=5vSzMaPX1a0)

I'm not saying the Tiger is going to win every time, but I'd say it would win 70%~ of the time as proven by the many videos. I do like Lions a lot more than Tigers but if I was forced to go into a cage with either one I would pick the Lion because Tigers are known to be more coldblooded, ferocious. These beasts are men eaters. They also kill brown bears, crocs, pythons, etc...

[deion2123]

Female Tiger kills Male Lion (http://youtube.com/watch?v=5vSzMaPX1a0)

I'm not saying the Tiger is going to win every time, but I'd say it would win 70%~ of the time as proven by the many videos. I do like Lions a lot more than Tigers but if I was forced to go into a cage with either one I would pick the Lion because Tigers are known to be more coldblooded, ferocious. These beasts are men eaters. They also kill brown bears, crocs, pythons, etc...

tigers are better fighter than lions..tigers have to fend for themsleves while lions fight in packs

[deion2123]

oh and the lairweb site is a bunch of random dudes giving their opinion so it doesnt count as a source

[i seen hippos]

tigers are better fighter than lions..tigers have to fend for themsleves while lions fight in packs

Horrible logic. Hunting and fighting aren't the same.

[AznBBoyX]

[I]
Those videos are garbage, a MALE Lion...the one that LIVES in the JUNGLE, will MURDER a Tiger, I don't care what a ZOO Lion who looks like a baby does against a much larger Tiger. Lions are alot larger then the one in that video, I have done a research paper on Lions in university...they are the most ferocious animal in the world, no one messes with them because they know their wrath. I'm not saying Tigers are weak, because they are far from it...they are the monsters of Asia, Lions are the monsters of the Jungle...in a fight, I'd put my money on a grown ass male Lion any day of the week.

Hmm..... What if I told you that lions don't live in jungles. So all this crap you said about lions being king of the jungle, monsters of the jungle, blah blah blah, is just a bunch of crap.

[brentlion]

Hmm..... What if I told you that lions don't live in jungles. So all this crap you said about lions being king of the jungle, monsters of the jungle, blah blah blah, is just a bunch of crap.
lions are capable of amazing feats of strength. for example, a 416 lb lion can pull a carcass weighing 1000 lbs a distance of over 400 feet. that`s about a 60% difference in weight, so lions, as such, would need a muscle mass of about 60%. and this makes sense because with about 600 muscles in it`s body, higher percentages in muscle percentage is impossible at weights higher than 416 lbs, which i deduce must be a lions average weight. such a feat takes the strength of 10 men.

at 416 lbs, a lion has about 250 lbs of muscle. the average 150 lb man has about 40% of muscle. even though people have less than 1/10th the muscle mass of a lion, a lion`s muscles, at similar weights, are 40% stronger, due to their far hectic lifestyle.

recent reports from zoologists have found that a study of about 15 male siberians captured and released in the wild much smaller than previously thought, and not one tiger was found to weigh over 420 lbs.

lions, living in prides and having to protect the territory, are taller with big manes, as this aids in intimidation and helps to prevent a fight by conveying the message of being strong and powerful. even so, lions fight often, and 50% of all males die in fights with rivals. such fighting, over time, has made the lion a more aggressive animal.

tigers, living alone, have longer teeth and claws, an adaptation that suits a lone hunter. also, they have shorter legs. shorter legs produce more speed.
example: limbs, when moved, fall in a curve pattern. shorter limbs have a shorter curve and so takes less time to reach it`s mark. also, the receptors that send the command to move has less distance to travel before it reaches the brain. the shorter the distance traveled, the quicker your reaction. with their short limbs, tigers are capable of great speed and agility, and are, on average, 15% faster than lions.

tigers, with their shorter limbs, use up more energy quicker, so they tire easily. that`s one of the reasons they live in forests; it provides the perfect cover for a shorter chase.

also, here`s some info from zoos and documentaries; a lion named moran from

[brentlion]

Hmm..... What if I told you that lions don't live in jungles. So all this crap you said about lions being king of the jungle, monsters of the jungle, blah blah blah, is just a bunch of crap.
check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3tYWJ_Xx60

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JehkG5kDZM4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOSxVzC6C8Q&feature=related

lions win all the time. and they are the true king of beasts.

[The_Blur]

A Liger would kick both, a Lion's and a Tiger's ass! That's what I call huge.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cowCS_OoDSY

[SLY]

http://www.freewebs.com/jackjacksonj/index.htm

Great Article of a Tigers destroying Lions in almost every fight with ease

[SLY]

Wrong because its not about size. Its about the actual fight. If the 120lb knows how to fight and throw his hands he can drop that 250lb clown where he stands. Thats a fact especially if that 120lb packs power. Horrible example.

Care to try again perhaps? Maybe set variables for each fighter. You cant just leave it at physical size and think 250 wins out over 120. Its got to be MORE to the descriptions than weight and attitude.
Tiger >>>>> Lion

http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8132/liontiger7hddi6.jpg

[LakersDynasty]

I like lions more but it's not much of a battle when a tiger faces a lion, they win 90% of the time. There's a video of a female tiger beating two male lions on youtube.

Here's why tigers are superior fighters. Male lions aren't accustomed to fighting since the females do all the hunting in packs, occasionally a male lion will fight with another male lion for territory or breeding rights, but that's it. Tigers are on their own and are accustomed to fighting with anything that comes in their way. On top of that some tigers can weigh up to 850lbs which is 300 lbs more than a male lion, they are also a LOT more agile and have stronger hind legs which they use to stand up and swipe at their opponent, that's generally how they will beat lions. The only land animal that can take down a grown tiger is a siberian/grizzly bear. I don't think I've seen any videos of a tiger getting beat by another animal. But I've seen tons of videos of tigers taking down lions, anacondas, crocs etc...

[SLY]

I like lions more but it's not much of a battle when a tiger faces a lion, they win 90% of the time. There's a video of a female tiger beating two male lions on youtube.

Here's why tigers are superior fighters. Male lions aren't accustomed to fighting since the females do all the hunting in packs, occasionally a male lion will fight with another male lion for territory or breeding rights, but that's it. Tigers are on their own and are accustomed to fighting with anything that comes in their way. On top of that some tigers can weigh up to 850lbs which is 300 lbs more than a male lion, they are also a LOT more agile and have stronger hind legs which they use to stand up and swipe at their opponent, that's generally how they will beat lions. The only land animal that can take down a grown tiger is a siberian/grizzly bear. I don't think I've seen any videos of a tiger getting beat by another animal. But I've seen tons of videos of tigers taking down lions, anacondas, crocs etc...
good post

repped :)

[Lebron23]

I like lions more but it's not much of a battle when a tiger faces a lion, they win 90% of the time. There's a video of a female tiger beating two male lions on youtube.

Here's why tigers are superior fighters. Male lions aren't accustomed to fighting since the females do all the hunting in packs, occasionally a male lion will fight with another male lion for territory or breeding rights, but that's it. Tigers are on their own and are accustomed to fighting with anything that comes in their way. On top of that some tigers can weigh up to 850lbs which is 300 lbs more than a male lion, they are also a LOT more agile and have stronger hind legs which they use to stand up and swipe at their opponent, that's generally how they will beat lions. The only land animal that can take down a grown tiger is a siberian/grizzly bear. I don't think I've seen any videos of a tiger getting beat by another animal. But I've seen tons of videos of tigers taking down lions, anacondas, crocs etc...

Cool :cheers:

[bagelred]

It depends.


If they are playing baseball, I'll go with the Tigers.

If they are playing football, I'll go with the Lions.



Context is everything.

[SLY]

It depends.


If they are playing baseball, I'll go with the Tigers.

If they are playing football, I'll go with the Lions.



Context is everything.
gay

[cartmanclone]

From everything I have read, a grizzly or polar bear would easily kill lions or tigers.

Actually, in ancient days, they would pit these animals against each other for entertainment. It is my understanding that the bear is the most ruthless of all.
not necessarily the most ruthless, but the biggest, most muscle laced, and with the ability to throw a haymaker

[RedBlackAttack]

not necessarily the most ruthless, but the biggest, most muscle laced, and with the ability to throw a haymaker
Grizzly Bears are the ultimate carnivore.


Grizzly bears - the ultimate carnivore:

Almost all queries received on this topic request answers to the lion versus tiger question. Oddly, few people simply ask which is considered the Ultimate Carnivore.

This honour is held by an animal the tiger does not often have encounter; it is the grizzly bear.

The grizzly bear is a poor predator, taking down a caribou only when the opportunity arises. This, however, shifted his evolution in favour of the job in hand, namely as a digger of hard barren ground for roots, tubers and den building. The grizzly bear subsequently evolved enormous bone and muscle density; roughly ten times our own for a given size. They have developed into huge and enormously powerful animals.

Big cat biology is very different. They have evolved powerful elastic muscles over a low weight, low density bone structure to suit their purpose of chasing down prey.

Grizzly bear pit fights:

The Californians of the late 19th century staged well-documented pit fights with grizzlies and spanish bulls. The grizzlies, using their paw as a club, shattered the unfortunate bull's skull or shoulder bones so easily that the betting became poor.

Eventually, and at considerable cost, African lions were brought in to raise the stakes. The most fierce of the adult males was sent in whilst the grizzly was already waiting in the pits. The lion was known for bravely charging straight in and looked good for the money, but the grizzly killed a male lion almost as easily as he'd killed the bull.

http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html


Basically...

Bear >>>>>> Tiger > Lion

[sommervilleCdn]

http://www.icebin.net/upload/lion_tiger.jpg

[GOBB]

Anacondas are slow ass snakes. How hard is it for a Tiger/Lion to kill one? Bite the **** out of the neck and you're good.

I wouldnt bet against a Grizzly Bear who can stand on its two legs and throw wild haymakers. And I'm sure it packs a pretty mean bite.

[LakersDynasty]

Anacondas are slow ass snakes. How hard is it for a Tiger/Lion to kill one? Bite the **** out of the neck and you're good.

I wouldnt bet against a Grizzly Bear who can stand on its two legs and throw wild haymakers. And I'm sure it packs a pretty mean bite.
Yeah but if a Lion/Tiger makes a wrong move the anaconda will squash it to death. Once it gets a hold of you there's no getting out, not even for a bear. Anacondas hunt down crocs regularly, though they are not big african crocs.

Bears are the undisputed king, no doubt.

[RedBlackAttack]

Bears are the undisputed king, no doubt.
I read that, when they would have pit fights between bears, lions, and bulls, grizzlies would break bulls/lions NECKS with one swipe. They can stand up to 9-feet tall.

I even read this story that, in one well documented pit fight, a grizzly took down 20 bulls AT THE SAME TIME. :eek:

[SLY]

What about a Silverback Gorilla VS. a Grizzly Bear

[LakersDynasty]

I read that, when they would have pit fights between bears, lions, and bulls, grizzlies would break bulls/lions NECKS with one swipe. They can stand up to 9-feet tall.

I even read this story that, in one well documented pit fight, a grizzly took down 20 bulls AT THE SAME TIME. :eek:
Wow, that's crazy.


What about a Silverback Gorilla VS. a Grizzly Bear
That would be something to watch. Silverbacks have 100 times more strength than the average human being, and 10 times more than the strongest man alive. It's a tough one to judge but the bear has the size advantage.

[LakersDynasty]

Holy shit, what a beautiful beast.

http://www.solarnavigator.net/animal_kingdom/animal_images/gorilla_silverback_zoo_dreamstime.jpg

http://www.solarnavigator.net/animal_kingdom/animal_images/Gorilla_Bristol_zoo_western_lowland_standing_knuck les.jpg

http://www.solarnavigator.net/animal_kingdom/animal_images/Brown_bear_rearing.jpg

http://www.dreamstime.com/a-grizzly-bear-paw-thumb3269371.jpg

Last pic stretched out the page.

[RedBlackAttack]

What about a Silverback Gorilla VS. a Grizzly Bear
The answer from an expert (zoologist Jonathon Wright who works at the London Zoo) is that a grizzly would have a significant advantage in virtually all areas:


Answer
Dear Jason

Thanks for your question.

Please note that grizzly bears and gorillas have reputations for ferocity, but these are probably exaggerated. This is especially true for gorillas, which are far more peaceful than the ‘King Kong' image suggests. In fact, chimpanzees are far more dangerous and will kill each other, as well as hunting in groups and tearing monkeys and antelopes apart.

Gorillas live in Africa, while grizzly bears live in North America, so there is no likelihood of them coming into contact with one another in the wild, unless one of them were introduced into the habitat of the other.

They also live in different habitats. Most gorillas inhabit lowland tropical rainforest, but some live in bamboo forest and montane rainforest. The grizzly bear prefers open habitats, such as tundra, alpine meadows and coastlines. This means that a gorilla would not adapt well to the bear's habitat and the bear would not adapt well to the gorilla's habitat.

I think that if they ever came into contact, they would avoid one another. Grizzly bears rarely attack people and prefer to avoid confrontation. A male gorilla will go through various threat displays and will avoid fighting if he can. If anything, I think the gorilla would back down if the bear did not move away and I can't really imagine a bear being put off by a gorilla chest-beating or hooting. A gorilla will usually only attack if an aggressor runs away. It will back down if the aggressor stays where it is. I can't really see the grizzly turning tail.

I think a fight would be very unlikely, but if they were to fight, I believe that the bear holds most of the trump cards. If the gorilla and grizzly are the same size, it would involve a full-grown male gorilla fighting a rather small grizzly bear. This will benefit the gorilla more than if there were two full-grown animals fighting, as the bear would be heavier.

The gorilla is mainly vegetarian and rarely feeds on animal matter, whereas a grizzly can kill a moose with one swipe of its paw. The bear has the advantage here.

The gorilla's ferocity is a bluff to deter potential adversaries. The bear is being genuinely ferocious and has the advantage here, as it is less likely to back down.

Both have powerful canine teeth and use these mainly in threat displays. The bear is more likely to use the canines to bite and kill prey, while gorillas are practically herbivorous. The bear has the advantage here.

Both have powerful upper limbs, but the bear has long claws, whereas the gorilla has nails. Once again, the bear has the advantage to the bear.

The gorilla is more intelligent than the bear, but the gorilla has more facial expressions. Bear keepers say that it is very difficult to read a bear's mind, because of the lack of facial expression. I don't think the gorilla would be able to either, so I don't think the gorilla's intelligence would be much of an advantage here.

Perhaps the only advantage to a gorilla and bear in a one-on-one situation is habitat. The bear would have the advantage in a clearing, but the gorilla would have the advantage if it ran into a rainforest or montane forest and the bear followed. I can't really imagine a bear chasing a gorilla into a forest or other gorillas fighting the bear – I presume you want a one-on-one fight. Chimpanzees can band together to kill leopards, but I haven't heard cases of gorillas doing so.

But, as I stated earlier, I don't think a fight would be likely, especially as one of the animals would be rather disorientated in a strange habitat. It is also unusual for individuals of different species to fight one another. The nearest is when a predator is attacking a prey animal. As bears do not prey on gorillas, this is not a natural phenomenon.

I hope the above scenario does not occur. I don't like the idea of people gaining enjoyment by watching animals fight one another. I hope that your argument is more of a speculative nature, rather than a desire to see animals fighting to the death. Gorillas are becoming increasingly threatened by deforestation and hunting for bushmeat and trophies, while various types of grizzly bear are also threatened. The Mexican grizzly bear is extinct, while other varieties have been classified as threatened under the US Endangered Species Act. Having grizzly bears and gorillas fighting one another is not a good idea.

All the best

Jonathan

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Wild-Animals-705/silver-gorilla-versus-grizzly.htm

Interesting read...

[gts]

http://www.solarnavigator.net/animal_kingdom/animal_images/gorilla_silverback_zoo_dreamstime.jpglooks like my uncle fred

[hateraid]

Exactly!

Where is Jerm at? These are his mofo pets! Someone signal Jerm. nevermind I'll do it...

*tosses bag of DUNG in the air*

:lol:


Lol, I miss that mofo too.

My brother actually did a report on this subject and concluded lion as well. One thing I think wasn't mentioned is the mane is a defense mechanism to prevent neck attacks. It's own personal neck armour.

[veilside23]

id still pick a lion over a tiger if both are full grown...

how about a polar bear and a grizzly bear?

[LakersDynasty]

id still pick a lion over a tiger if both are full grown...

how about a polar bear and a grizzly bear?
I'm going with a grizzly bear. If I'm not mistaken, they grow larger.

[B-Diddy=2Easy]

Wolf or Hyena?

[brantonli]

The funny thing is most people toss out the title King of the Jungle for the Lions, but they live on savannahs, and it's some of the tigers which live in jungles.

[RedBlackAttack]

I'm going with a grizzly bear. If I'm not mistaken, they grow larger.
Actually, polar bears are bigger than grizzlies. However, grizzlies are more ferocious.


Polar bear versus grizzly bear: http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/conflict13.html considers that the grizzly bear may be the ultimate carnivore, being more ferocious than other brown bears. Polar bears are generally larger than grizzly bears and are said to take off a human head with one swipe. Polar bears fight other polar bears more often than Brown bears fight other brown bears. If the grizzly and polar bears were of the same size, the grizzly bear would probably be stronger, as it is more robustly built, with enormous bone and muscle density. It has powerful arm muscles and a massive hump of muscle on its back that empowers the upper body with massive strength. The grizzly has a shorter, thicker neck, heavily built skull and more powerful shoulder structure than the polar bear. Its huge 6-9 inch long claws can open a carcass; the claws of the polar bear are 2 inches long. Grizzly bears have been known to fight off polar bears from their feeding areas. The grizzly bear has more power to strike a blow. The polar bear overheats extremely quickly and would find it difficult to fight for a long time.

My prediction: the grizzly bear would usually win, but the polar bear would have the advantage in an Arctic environment, unless the fight took a lot of time - then the grizzly bear would have the advantage.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Wild-Animals-705/wildlife-matchups.htm



How about this.... there are actually polar bear/grizzly bear hybrid that have been found in the wild. It is called a Nanulak.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grizzly%E2%80%93polar_bear_hybrid


Wolf or Hyena?

Well... the experts say that it depends on the kinds of hyenas or wolves that we are talking about. Apparently, though, the spotted hyena would be the favorite against any wolf.


Hyena versus wolf: http://lists.claws-and-paws.com/pipermail/pa-furry/2002-May/002054.html states that hyenas are more fearsome killers than wolves and will kill and eat everything. Wolves go for the neck, while hyenas go for the legs, trying to break the hinds of their prey, causing much suffering and tending to disable the victim faster. Hyenas use their strong, bone-crushing jaws to latch on. The hyena holds on while the victim runs away until it is exhausted.

I presume this account refers to the spotted hyena, which is a very able hunter. In fact, many accounts of hyenas taking over lion kills are misinformed. Sometimes, lions will try to take over hyena kills and the hyenas will fight back.

My prediction: A wolf will beat a striped or brown hyena (and will definitely beat the weak-toothed aardwolf) in a fight. The spotted hyena will beat a wolf, as it is much more powerfully built and has stronger jaws.


http://en.allexperts.com/q/Wild-Animals-705/wildlife-matchups.htm





....I love the internet. :bowdown:

[SLY]

Lion would take this

[TennesseeFan]

dick

[nathanjizzle]

tigers are better fighters than lions, they have more killer instinct.