Lion and Tiger vs Bear and Gorilla

@jay_z94:

They are completely different animals. Crocodiles don't have a thick layer of fat or fur.

Oh. So you're saying that the bear has THICKNESS and not durability. Okay, that makes sense.

Hair makes a huge difference compared to crocodile and rhino skin. And i'm talking about gripping with their claws.

Claws? Lol they won't do crap do a bear. The force of the blow is what does damage most of the time, but the tiger can't really hurt the bear that way.

Not even an inch of fat? That's laughable, have you ever seen a bear? They have to accumulate enough fat to survive long hibernation.

Polar bear's coat is around 1-2 inches, while it's fat layer is up to 4 inches thick.

The coat (if you mean fur) is thick, but the hide isn't. The fat is actually thick though, you're right. I don't know what was wrong with the previous source, but further research (had to use books) proved you right. However, when the teeth sink and make an opening, the tiger's mouth can move down. So, we have a tiger clamping down on the neck (the area without 4 pounds of fat, only at most 2, because the stomach holds most fat) and barely piercing a polar bear. That is different, but the sheer force/pressure (1,000 pounds per square inch!) should really hurt the bear. Pain would prevent a quick solution, cause confusion, and crush the bear's internal neck (can it withstand 1,000 pounds of pressure PER SQUARE INCH? That's like putting a 100 thousand pound pebbles on a bear's neck.) The teeth could not reach that far, but the pressure still allows for a kill.

In animal fights like these, weight is everything. And yes it does indicate size and strength.

Of course weight indicates size and strength, that's not what I meant. I meant that the weight is irrelevant because the size and strength (factors tied to weight) have been determined and used as arguments already.

So this is a 1075 pound Tiger vs 2200 pound bear? You do realise it is double it's weight, right?

Which is why a head-to-head battle is hopeless for the tiger, which would get around the bear to eventually get on it's back and bite the neck.

This is a straight up fight though... and the tiger is not hiding from the bear's sense of smell.

The bear knows where it is, but smell takes time. The bear would probably need a few seconds to locate the exact place the tiger is currently at. Obviously tigers can ambush since it happens in Siberia, unless they somehow beat bears head to head.

Ok, but the tiger is in the bear's sight. Tigers never run off and then come back to ambush.

This is a hypothetical situation. We don't even know what would happen. I'm guessing it would ambush (not run of, but run to a location where it could ambush. I guess same thing?) because that's what they know to do. Charging head first into battle is against every fiber in their body and all their instincts. Animals have heavy values of self-preservation, so I think that even a bloodlusted tiger would relocated itself to get an advantage (a real tiger would run.)

Yes the lion will be a non-factor.

No, it can distract. For at least 10 seconds if not more (dodging, trying to attack, getting killed by a swipe, the bear checking for death, etc.) which gives the tiger ample time to blindside the bear.

It wasn't an insult, in my previous response I thought you believed a tiger would win in a direct fight, but I stand corrected.

Oh, okay. Anyone that mental I would insult too.

As I said, yes tigers have eaten female, young and hibernating bears, never a fully grown male in a direct confrontation, but you agree with this.

Yeah. Tigers COULD ambush bears that are over 1000 pounds and kill them, but they don't. That's due to risk. Like I said, self-preservation is the main instinct of animals (that aren't parents lol) so that makes them cautious.

However, your whole argument is about the tiger ambushing the bear, but this is a straight up fight, not a hunt. The tiger would not run away just to ambush it.

The ambush part might seem misleading. I mean it would get around the bear to jump on the back, but that means getting out of the bear's line of sight in order to come from behind (because bears don't just stand there and wait for creatures to walk around them.) In reality, nobody knows what the tiger or bear would do if they HAD to fight. Because they never would, since they are both top predators and they respect each other in a way (or respect the damage they could do.) I take the tiger's hunting tactics and apply it to the fight, because that's the only thing I can do. Naturally, the tiger (in my opinion) would apply its hunting skills with the bear.

However, we are humans. We think tactically. What WE think a bear would do and a lion would do isn't what the actual creatures would do. So, this fights depends on how the animals decide to battle each other. That's why I dislike animal battles with vague OPs; they make us decide how animals act.

@jay_z94:

Not really, they can have enough durability to shrug off firearms.

Yeah I meant that the thickness=their durability.

I wasn't talking about the claws damaging the bear. They won't grip in order to stay on the bear, and the bear can throw it off easily.

Oh, I see. The tiger doesn't use claws. It raps its paws around the bear's neck and bites. This only works well if the bear is standing, when they leap on the back, wrap their arms around the neck, and bite the jugular. They move from the back to the front, but only their mouth the reach the neck. It's hard to explain.

The bear would definitely feel pain. If the Tiger is biting under the Jaw, this is where the bear can easily stand up and either club it or throw it off. The Tiger won't be taking too many shots to the head and still hanging on. If the Tiger is on top of the bear, it can't perform a killing bite as it won't be able to get it's jaws around the top of the neck and won't be able to cut off the blood/air supply.

Usually the tiger waits for it to stand up, actually. That's how they get to the jugular safely. Otherwise it is biting at the back of the neck where the tiger does less damage and where the windpipe is secured by lots of muscle. It CAN get around the bear's neck (bite sideways) but not all of it. That's why it needs to allow the bear to stand.

Not really, I gave examples of strength from a 1000 pound bear, not a 2200 pound bear.

Either way, we can both agree that if the bear gets in a full force swing it kills the tiger.

I've explained above why this won't be effective. Also eventually the cat will tire.

So would the bear (although not as quickly?) I think this battles ends quick... either the bear one-shots or the tiger gets a bite at the jugular and wins. But, if the tiger tires then the bear tires, and the lion can do something useful.... maybe.

No they've never beaten fully grown males head to head, only hibernating ones and females and young ones. This is irrelevant as the females would have smelt the tiger, but wouldn't have been able to do anything about.

They've never beat bears head to head period. They ambush. You are underestimating female bears, but overestimating smell. The tiger doesn't stalk from 5 feet away, it stalks from several bounds away. The bear can't EXACTLY pinpoint where the tiger is, and it would try to run away, not go towards the threat. That's why bears avoid tiger tracks (although this is usually a mutual avoidance.) The smell is NOT a spider sense, and it doesn't tell when a predator will pounce. That's the issue. I also know the tiger ambushed the bear, because even females could one-shot a male tiger.

We are using real animal behaviours here.

Exactly. That's why I used the hunting tactics tactics of tigers when they actually hunt bears. It's how tigers react to bears.

The Tiger would either A: Run away completely

That's literally the only realistic outcome. Both the bear AND the tiger would run, due to self-preservation values. These two animals would never fight in the wild. Hunting is different, because only one of the animals would know what is happening.

or B: Fight head on. Tigers have never ran off to then ambush another predator. They only ambush when they are hunting prey, which is a completely different scenario to fighting another predator.

Not at all. When animals are the same species they fight head on, that's it. And they don't go for the kill either. Tigers don't run off, you misunderstand. They RUN AROUND the bear until the can get on the back. That's why I said earlier that tigers prefer hunting brown bears: they live in open spaces, which give room to get a vantage point and to come from the side or behind. After all, tigers run faster than a bear can turn.

Yeah like I said previously, they would either run or fight, depends on how desperate they are. I've never found a case of a Tiger killing another bear over 1000 pounds.

But it doesn't depend on desperation, because they NEVER DO THAT. Would you rob a chimpanzee of its food if you were starving? No, you'd probably rob a smaller, less dangerous monkey, because chimps>humans. You COULD win if you ambushed (hypothetically speaking for the analogy) but you wouldn't risk it.

Wow that's an awful analogy wtf.

Fair enough, that's your opinion. But by reading up on their behaviour, they would never run away from a predator to then ambush it.

That's true, because they wouldn't HAVE to fight the predator. In this case, the animals HAVE to fight. The tiger's first instinct is to run, but it realizes fighting is the only option later. That's why it ambushes, because that's what it knows to do.

However, it is more likely that a tiger would get around a bear and get to its back (assuming this is an open battlefield.) I feel that the OP is too vague, so that's why we can't agree. The conditions aren't set. In a small room a bear wins. On the African Plains a tiger wins. It depends on whether the animals act like they usually would as well. If so, how do you get them to fight? If the animals are mindless and just kill for the sake of it, then the bear wins since the cats don't stop to think and get around the threat, but charge head on. The vagueness makes this so hard to debate, so for our personal debate's sake we should pick a location (I mean we are the only ones on this thread lol.)

Edit: the Battle Rules say that fights are on a city street 15 feet apart without specification. That means the tiger has space to get around the bear, but can't ambush. Clears things up a bit I guess.

A gorilla is a weak link for the bear to work with. Also do you mean a Grizzly Bear or Polar Bear or Kodiak Bear? Either three could win.

@jay_z94:

Yes but the claws ensure that the paws hang on. There's no way that the Tiger's teeth will go through the fur, skin, fat, muscle AND hit the jugular (which is deep within the neck anyways), especially on top of the neck. No 'chance. At best it would apply pressure to it, which will take way too long to be effective and allow the bear to throw it off.

Tigers have a chance if they hit the throat. They could probably rip open the bear's neck from there, which is going to stop the bear in its tracks, dead or not.

How would you know this is how they do it if they've never killed a fully grown male up front? Anyways, to be most effective it would have to bite under the neck, leaving it right in the path of the Bear's on paws, that's suicide for the cat.

It's literally exactly what they do for every bear they encounter (brown bears at least) if they want to hunt them. Tigers aren't dumb, they have strategies for killing. They even use bear's mating calls when hunting them.

Again, I can't see the tiger directly hitting the jugular at all in this fight. The only damage the cats can do is superficial.

By hitting the throat the tiger can do so much damage, its not even funny.

Again this is a head to head fight.

Yes, but it doesn't have to stay that way. Tigers can go around a bear pretty easily, and the bear has two targets to pick from that look very similar. The tiger already hunts bears, so that makes it go for the bear most likely.

The tiger isn't hunting the bear in this scenario.

The cat MIGHT eventually be able to get behind the bear. The bear isn't that far behind in speed but has more stamina.

They don't need to hunt, they just need to outmaneuver the bear. They could wait for an opportunity to hit the throat, that's all it takes.

I can see where you are coming from, but Lions have tried to hunt elephants before out of desperation before even though they never do. Us humans don't think like animals do

But lions are pack hunters; they have a pride. I'm also fairly sure that those aren't bull male elephants.

Hmmm, then we'd would have to think how far later? It's too speculative.

I agree, the outcome is very unclear.

I think we've boiled this debate down to 3 things:

1. Head on Fight, the Bear wins.

Yup.

2. Ambush is out of the question due to the default battle environment.

Yes, but it could outmaneuver a bear easily.

3. The only thing to discuss really is the Tiger circling the bear and whether it could get on it's back and whether it would succeed in causing any significant damage. My opinion is that it might manage to due to being slightly faster (but less stamina) but can't directly bite the jugular from the top of the neck due to it's thick fur, skin, fat, muscle and the fact that the jugular lies deep. It would apply pressure, but this is a much, much slower death, meaning the bear will have ample time to throw it off and Maul it to death, especially since the cat would be losing stamina trying to get on the back of the bear in the first place.

Much more agile, and I think the tiger could easily run faster than the bear could turn. The tiger bites the throat, and the bear dies. The bottom neck has little fat, muscle, and fur compared to other places, that's why tigers WOULD kill a bear if attacking there. I mean, they kill gaur reguarly.

Look how gaurs are so bulky, and can dwarf regular cows. Bears are probably a gaur's size, and tigers kill gaurs. Gaurs don't have as much fat, because they don't hibernate. That's all muscle there.

@xiix: Bear and Gorilla wins

@jay_z94:

"Rip open the bear's neck", Never.

You underestimate the damage tiger's can do. A solid bite at the throat can kill a bear, no question.

Yes, when they are hunting. Not the case here.

Just because they aren't hunting doesn't mean they can't do things that they do when they hunt. They could still go around the bear and perform the attack they do while hunting.

But it won't get through to the jugular, it would only apply pressure to it, which would take too long to kill the bear. It's bites would only JUST penetrate the fat layer.

Are you serious? The fur doesn't do much at the throat, it is not thick there. The hide isn't crazy durable, it gets easily pierced. The bear DOES NOT have 4 inches of fat at the neck. It has 1-2 inches max at the throat, and that's being generous.

But on it's back it won't do significant damage

It starts on the back. You specifically argued the bear would then stand up. When it does, the tiger rotates to bite the throat.

Yeah it could outmanoeuvre it, doing significant damage is another story

Not if it attacks like it does while hunting (and you act like the tiger can't hurt a bear, but they have hunted and killed them so many times.) Female bears aren't that much less durable than males; they also hibernate, meaning they have roughly equal fat amounts.

They've tried and failed haha

Of course they would fail, but they don't attack bull elephants. They've attacked small weak ones, and sometimes won. Self-preservation is so important for animals, they would NEVER attack the bull elephants.

Again you can't compare the bear to other animals like that, it has way more fur, fat and muscle.

The gaur has MUCH more muscle than a bear of that size. Look at how rippling the body is. Also, muscle>>>>>>>>fat durability.

The tiger either gets on it's back and does no significant damage, or it goes for the suicide option at the front of the neck where the bear stands up and mauls it to death.

If it stands up the tiger does was it usually would do while fighting: attack from behind, bite the throat after getting your head in the right position to bite from the back.

Is a bear that much of a tank? None of us fully know what would happen in this hypothetical battle -- that would never happen anyway -- but speaking like it's a fact, is ill advised.

@jay_z94:

Yes, if the Bear was sleeping and let it. You're underestimating the bear's durability, it has tanked firearms

But the tiger WILL have opportunities to bite the throat. Have bears tanked firearms to the neck? Of course not.

I've already said it could circle the bear and get on it's back

Okay.

Where's your proof for all of this? Have you actually seen a Bear before? Their Necks are huge, and again their hide is durable enough to take bullets

I don't have to proof that bear's don't have 4 inches of fat on their neck. You have to prove that they do.

Rotates where? You do realise that the 700 pound tiger is not a gymnast and that the Bear isn't a playground?

It reaches over from behind the back to get at the throat. Rotating was the wrong word.

The bears it hunts though are nowhere near the size of Kodiak or Polar bears. And still it's only killed females, young and hibernating bears.

Yes, but the tigers aren't anywhere near the largest tigers either. The largest tigers are held captive, wild tigers don't exceed 900 pounds most of the time. Same goes with bears. The tigers hunting the bears are around 600 pounds, much less than the largest tiger. Also, you said that its only killed females even though I addressed that in my last post (this was your counter for the statement.) Female bears aren't that much less durable than males; they also hibernate, meaning they have roughly equal fat amounts.

It only has muscle though. The bear has thick fur, a lot of fat and a lot of muscle. The Gaur's neck is thin compared to a bear's. Compare the picture below to the Gaur's neck. Keep in mind that this huge neck also has a lot more fat.

The fur can EASILY be bypassed, why do you mention that? The fat isn't thick enough at the neck. 4 inches is an ABSURD amount of fat if you really look at how thick it would be. Also, the fur makes up most of a bear's body, making them look much thicker, even though the fur will easily get bypassed and the fat is what would be needed.

And the gaur has no hair, making its neck much thinner. That's how thick ALL necks are without hair and fat. Necks don't need much muscle.

And from the back the bite will be useless. I doubt it could even get it's jaws clamped around that huge neck.

That's why it hits the throat. And the tiger doesn't need to hit the entire throat, only get the vulnerable parts. The bear would still bleed and be very hurt.

To address the picture:

Bears are huge, but you forget that tigers are big as well. And lots of the bear's volume is fur that makes it look huge. The fur does little to stop attacks, but makes it much bigger. If that bear was shaved it would be a different story... and nothing indicates that a large bear would have 4 inches of fat at the neck, because my research says that POLAR BEARS have 4 inches on their TORSO. And that's the MAXIMUM they have, other places have less. I know this bear in the battle would have more fat, but that doesn't mean it would have lots of fat at the neck.

Don't act like bears dwarf tigers either.

No animal is soloing anything, lol.

The bears takes whatever animal it goes against, I agree that, but I'm not sure it does it before the other downs the gorilla. While gorillas are ridiculously strong, they're not predators; that's like saying a beast body builder can down a great MMA fighter just because he's super strong; doesn't necessarily equate to that; same goes here.

If the tiger or lion down the gorilla before he other can down the bear, I give it to the big cats.

Team Cats. Either the Lion or Tiger takes out the Gorilla and then help each other to overwhelm the Bear

@thespartanb345t:

I think you are confused. The bears tigers kill are not in the same league for one. Pictures shows grizzly or Kodiak. Which are much .more aggressive and are powerful enough to kill any cat with one swipe of its law. Gorilla is really a non factor as lions kill them and leapards kill them often. But The cats loose here were not talking black sun or brown, these are different beast, one bite or swipe will end either cat, even if they surviv the first blow they are out of the fight.....I like the Lions much better but let's be more realistic. The chance for a lion or tiger to sirb long enough to try to bite the throat are slim enough, but the jaws just aren't big enough with this beast, and with the coat it's nigh impossible

The largest tiger is still not nearly enough against a Kodiak, or polar bear

@destinyman75:

I think you are confused. The bears tigers kill are not in the same league for one. Pictures shows grizzly or Kodiak. Which are much .more aggressive and are powerful enough to kill any cat with one swipe of its law.

Yes, but tigers won't attack head on. I'm aware brown bears aren't Kodiaks, but they ARE very close to grizzlies.

Gorilla is really a non factor as lions kill them and leapards kill them often. But The cats loose here were not talking black sun or brown, these are different beast, one bite or swipe will end either cat, even if they surviv the first blow they are out of the fight.....

They won't attack head on at all. Tiger hunt bears by getting on the back and biting the neck.

I like the Lions much better but let's be more realistic.The chance for a lion or tiger to sirb long enough to try to bite the throat are slim enough, but the jaws just aren't big enough with this beast, and with the coat it's nigh impossible

The coat doesn't do crap, lol. You realize that hair parts with interference, right? The teeth will go right through the coat and get inside the bear. The neck being thick is useless, because the tiger doesn't need to wrap its jaw through the entire neck. It just needs to get part of it. If 10% of your neck is gone, you're still dead.

The largest tiger is still not nearly enough against a Kodiak, or polar bear

Why? The largest tiger is 12 feet and 1,025 pounds. The tallest bear was 11 feet tall, and weighed 2200 pounds. The bear has weight and strength, but the tiger still has this. Think about it: the bear would struggle to get the tiger off its back, and the lion would quickly dispatch a gorilla. The lion would turn to the bear, and now its a 2 v 1. They overwhelm the bear, and the lion or tiger will have an opportunity to attack the jugular because of this. 1 v 1 I bet the bear, but more often than not the tiger would hold off long enough to get help.

I just want to clear up some misunderstanding here about lions and tigers.

1. Both the big cats have the same bite force. This has been said by researchers and nat geo. it was before believed that lions only had a bite force of about 700 - 750 psi but that was because the researchers used a sub-adult male lions. When a new study was done, it said and I quote - "Hyenas, lions, and tigers generate around 1,000 psi (4,450 newtons)." Another thing to note, the male lion actually never uses it full bite strength unless needed to or threatened, while the tiger needs to as it is a solitary hunter and needs to bring down it's prey more quickly.

https://www.google.co.za/search?q=lions+bite+force&oq=lions+bite+force&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.2552j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

2. Power. Tigers have stronger hind legs, which gives them amazing maneuverability. They are also more power full due to size, but only by a little. The male lion, fully grown of course, on the other hand had better upper body strength and paw strength. The tiger has faster paw swipes, as it is more swift but the lion has stronger paw swipes due to a stronger upper body.

3. People need to stop bring in old records. Those records are sometimes inaccurate and false. Most people believes that the tiger ALWAYS won in the coliseum but that is false. It has even been said that the Romans called the tiger cowardly as it ran away from the lion and tried to escape and then the lion lost interest, then attacked him. In fact, there are illegal you tube videos, from china, I don't want to post such cruel videos, that show a male lion and male tiger going at each other and the tiger being downed or running away from fear and the lion just giving up and leaving. There are also moments where the tiger downs the lion and then moves away.

4. Fighting experience. This goes to the lion and lion alone. Male lions are raised to do 2 things, fighting and protect their pride and spreed their genes. They are also amazing hunters but that is besides the point. So, for these 2 things to come to fruition, from childhood, they are taught to fight between each others, they constantly see their fathers fight for dominance, and when i say constantly, I mean constantly. Then after they have grown up and kicked out of the pride, they still train by constantly fighting. If they take over a pride, given that they have formed a coalition, they will CONSTANTLY fighting among each other for dominance and to renew their love for each other. This is why I say, THEY ARE BORN TO FIGHT!

Now, I am not saying who is better. both are amazing fighters, tigers are better hunters and more used to bring out their true powers than lions. Lions on the other hand are faster, in terms of speed, much more aggressive and have stronger paw swipes. Another thing, the mane. The tiger can actually never kill the lion in the sense that he/she kills its prey - the throat. In fact, that is one of the main reason why male l;ions die so horribly in the wild - they get their genitals crushed and torn, their back bones broke and then they are left to die SLOWLY, BLEEDING OUT AND DUE TO HUNGER. Remember, once that back bone is gone, they hind legs are gone.

Anyway, at the end of the day, they are both amazing killers and can kill each other, given their day.

Another interesting fact, serbian tigers are no more the largest tigers in the world - the Bengal tigers are. According to WCS Russia, the foremost authority on Serbian tigers, who don't only monitor the population of the Serbian tiger but also protects them in the wild have said and I directly quote from their site - "

"Siberian tigers are often considered the largest of the tiger sub-species, although they are in fact about the same size as the Bengal tiger. An adult male usually reaches a body length of 2 meters, with his tail adding another meter. Average weight for males is 160-190 kg, while females are smaller, weighing in at 110-130 kg. The largest male captured for scientific research under the Siberian Tiger Project weighed in at 206 kg. Males, females and cubs can be distinguished by their tracks: a male’s paw pad measures 10.5 – 14.5 cm across, a female’s – 8.5 – 9.5. cm, and a cub’s – from 5.5. to 10 cm. (Male cubs, after one year, usually have paw measurements already larger than their mothers’.)

Siberian tigers’ coloring can be somewhat lighter than that of other tigers, especially in winter, and their fur is orange or light orange. Some people mistakenly think that Siberian tigers have white fur. White fur is actually a recessive genetic trait in Bengal tigers, and all white tigers in captivity today are decedents of a single white Bengal tiger taken from the wild in India."

https://russia.wcs.org/en-us/Wildlife/Amur-Tiger.aspx

@thespartanb345t said:

@jay_z94:

Umm... Is that Tiger getting what i think he is getting ?

@wewlad80:

I didn't even notice how bad that looked.

You at the tiger's face lol.

@thespartanb345t:

Your last point two vs one might work.

But the hair does part but its thick, and there's a layer of fat that can be torn out and not stop them, (it's thick enough to offset bites from other bears) the bear at that point would end it after Being wounded with a bite or swipe. Also they hunt bears again that are for the most part non aggressive and much less aware of there surroundings. The ones we are talking about are much more aggressiveand much more aware. And actually 11 feet is off that's not the biggest bear by any means some rare bears get 15 feet. Again rare bit still there. Also once a tiger is hit and it will be it over and the tiger then will fight on its back scraping and biting which is its death against one of these beast. I don't think you know just how MUCH stronger a bear is bite force that can crush a big cats skull, and swipes that can open them up too deep to recover from. Black bears, sun bears yeah that's different

@destinyman75:

But the hair does part butnits thick, and there's a layer of fat that can be torn out and not stop them,

The fat isn't thicker than the tiger's teeth at the throat. And the teeth are 3 inches.

the ebar at that point would end it after Being wounded with a bite or swipe.

When the tiger's on the back?

Also they hunt bears again that are for the most part non aggressive and much less aware of there surroundings.

Russian Brown Bears are the same as Grizzly Bears, and they are 2.1% of a Amur Tiger's diet.

The ones we are talking about are much more aggressiveand much more aware.

No, they aren't. Brown bears are the same in Russia and America, Kodiaks and Polar Bears are the only superior bears.

And actually 11 feet is off that's not the biggest bear by any means some rare bears get 15 feet.

Source? Because google says otherwise. Here is a link to the largest Kodiak bears. They are all under 12 feet.

Again rare bit still there. Also once a tiger is hit and it will be it over and the tiger then will fight on its back scraping and biting which is its death against one of these beast. I don't think you know just how MUCH stronger a bear is bite fore that can crush a big cats skull, and swipes that can open them up too deep to recover from. Black bears, sun bears yeah that's different

But the bear won't do crap when the tiger is on the back biting at the neck. It may take a while, but the bear can't do much at all other than stand up, which allows the tiger to reach over and get at the throat.

This^^

On topic--

As I said in an earlier post, I think team Big Cats can win with the LION as mvp!!

IMO of course...

@thespartanb345t: I would have to find the source was in a magazine when the net wasn't so big but yes Inam correct Google is often wrong. At any rate.

So you actually think a tiger can out bite a bear of this size?? Come on now we both know better then that, these bears bite micht harder. And that fur is defense against other big bears when they fight there are tons of vidoes I've watched two tonight that shows that neck fur get ruffled But no blood when the other bear latches on and shakes hard doesn't even draw blood it messes thebfir up and tears some out and this is after a fairly long time, a tiger isn't getting through as it won't have as much time nor as much bite force, nor the weight that the bear uaes pulling down and still no lethal damage. Watch the videos there are plenty.

As for the Russia bear tigers don't kill fully grown males at the first place rather younger newly on there own bears teens as you will or the smaller females. At any rate again they are simaler but they are NOT the same the Russian is much less adapt at fighting much less aggressive.

http://www.alaskabearsandwolves.com/theres-a-dead-fin-whale-at-the-end-of-the-rainbow/

There is another I believe that is linked that shows more in most bear fighting they go for the neck and it's the first that allows them to continue fighting they are made to take tons of punishment z they are far more durable

@thespartanb345t: Oh in those vidoes you will see the much heavier and stronger bears go for the neck it's a natural armor, ask the Grizzly man on YouTube

@destinyman75:

I would have to find the source was in a magazine when the net wasn't so big but yes Inam correct Google is often wrong. At any rate.

I don't see how my source was off... and most of those we record bears.

So you actually think a tiger can out bite a bear of this size?? Come on now we both know better then that, these bears bite micht harder.

Never said bears don't out bite tigers. Tigers still are faster, and can maneuver more. How would the bear bite something on its back?

And that fur is defense against other big bears when they fight there are tons of vidoes I've watched two tonight that shows that neck fur get ruffled But no blood when the other bear latches on and shakes hard doesn't even draw blood it messes thebfir up and tears some out and this is after a fairly long time, a tiger isn't getting through as it won't have as much time nor as much bite force, nor the weight that the bear uaes pulling down and still no lethal damage. Watch the videos there are plenty.

How did the bear get hurt then? Fighting another bear? You realize those fights are meant to SOLVE DISPUTES, not kill. And the tiger has 1,025 pounds of pressure per square inch... and fur doesn't stop 3 inch teeth. Piercing is not the same as blunt force damage.

As for the Russia bear tigers don't kill fully grown males at the first place rather younger newly on there own bears teens as you will or the smaller females. At any rate again they are simaler but they are NOT the same the Russian is much less adapt at fighting much less aggressive.

It is the same result with any bear. If you get attacked from the back as a bear, you panic. Bears stand up, and the tiger bites the throat after reaching over the shoulder. They don't kill fully grown males because of the risk, and because they don't need that excessive amount of food.

There is another I believe that is linked that shows more in most bear fighting they go for the neck and it's the first that allows them to continue fighting they are made to take tons of punishment z they are far more durable

That bear in the video is trying to assert dominance. It isn't killing its opponent because it doesn't want to, if it tried to the opponent may do the same. Animals DO NOT like getting killed, they would much rather walk away or have a less serious fight to solve issues. That bear would have crushed the neck of the other bear otherwise.

An all out,blood lusted bear will choke all three to the death or smash all three to the death.

@thespartanb345t:

Yes and if a bear isn't holding back and not just being dominant He's not going to just stand there either, he's going to be even more aggressive. The bears go for the neck all the time and and that natural armor works well.

Also tigers don't kill fully grown males because they can't or they would given hunger level and still they don't even try for a reason.

I've seen lions kill tigers and tigers kill lions but neither. I respect the bell out of Lions and tigers But the big bears are known as the top land carnivorous for a reason. There's also a vid I have to find that has a tiger, lion and bear living together, the bear is king there and even. breaks up disputes between the cat's. If tigers and lions don't mess with the big bears it's for a reason. Also a bear standing up and a tiger lunging would be the end of the cat ad the bears then have a free swipe of those giant paws and come down with a deadly bite.. But I don't mind agreeing to disagree, regardless neither would be happy whether they won or not because there would be injuries anyway

@destinyman75:

Yes and if a bear isn't holding back and not just being dominant He's not going to just stand there either, he's going to be even more aggressive. The bears go for the neck all the time and and that natural armor works well.

Are you talking about the video or the battle?

Also tigers don't kill fully grown males because they can't or they would given hunger level and still they don't even try for a reason.

Self-preservation>>>>>>>hunger in animals. There are enough weaker bears for tigers to kill, its not like the enormous males (usually only one in a huge area due to territory) are the only bears.

I've seen lions kill tigers and tigers kill lions but neither. I respect the bell out of Lions and tigers But the big bears are known as the top land carnivorous for a reason. There's also a vid I have to find that has a tiger, lion and bear living together, the bear is king there and even. breaks up disputes between the cat's. If tigers and lions don't mess with the big bears it's for a reason. Also a bear standing up and a tiger lunging would be the end of the cat ad the bears then have a free swipe of those giant paws and come down with a deadly bite.. But I don't mind agreeing to disagree, regardless neither would be happy whether they won or not because there would be injuries anyway

Of course they are afraid of bears, bears are huge predators that could threat big cats. But bears are afraid of tigers as well; they stray from the trails of their tracks.

You're right let's agree to disagree.

@thespartanb345t: Right, now we've boiled this debate down to specifically whether the Tiger will be able to perform a killing bite at the neck, lol

In my opinion he won't. Tiger's have never faced bears as big as kodiak or polar bears, who are much fattier and have been known to shrug off firearms. Around the back of the neck it will be impossible to hit the jugular directly due to the pure thickness, and will take a very long time to put down the bear through pressure alone. You act as though the bear will go down in seconds, which is completely ludicrous. It takes Tigers a very long time to put down Big game, the difference here being that the bear can actually stand up and defend itself properly and has the ability to one shot. Around the front it's suicide as the bear can throw it off or simply club it to death as it's hanging there.

I have a feeling that you aren't going to agree with this, so shall we agree to disagree?

Right, now we've boiled this debate down to specifically whether the Tiger will be able to perform a killing bite at the neck, lol

Yeah, not sure there.

In my opinion he won't. Tiger's have never faced bears as big as kodiak or polar bears, who are much fattier and have been known to shrug off firearms. Around the back of the neck it will be impossible to hit the jugular directly due to the pure thickness, and will take a very long time to put down the bear through pressure alone. You act as though the bear will go down in seconds, which is completely ludicrous. It takes Tigers a very long time to put down Big game, the difference here being that the bear can actually stand up and defend itself properly and has the ability to one shot. Around the front it's suicide as the bear can throw it off or simply club it to death as it's hanging there.

It would take a while, but the tiger would NEED to wait for the lion to finish if it wanted a chance. A 2 v 1 is where they can overwhelm a bear.

I have a feeling that you aren't going to agree with this, so shall we agree to disagree?

Yeah, I think it would be best that way. Usually I would want to keep debating (I enjoy it) but not on animal battles, those are far-fetched and you can't really do anything with such a vague OP.

What subspecies of bear is this?If it is one of these three grizzly,kodiak and polar,then either three of them is capable of defeating lion and tiger one on one,honestly but the match would be two vs 1 soon after one of big cats maul gorilla,gorilla being on this match and with grizzly make it worse for grizzly bear.

Team 1 would win with prep, but Ill say team 2 due to the rules.

Team 2.

lion and tiger wins

Team 1, gorilla is a weak link.

lol

Ends in sex

Lion and Tigress mate form a big ass Liger beats the overrated bear

Team 2.

T1

The Gorilla is a very weak link. Once the Lion or Toder deal with it and rather swiftly I might as they can overwhelm the bear.