Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2021 9:17:35 GMT -5
Eventually it will happen. It always does. In the meantime, feel free to quote my posts. I promise to keep things civil š. How aggressive do you think a lion is compared to a tiger? Both can be aggressive. However, Lions as I stated in my original post are born fighters. Play fighting as cubs to real fighting as adults. Being more aggressive isn't always the precursor to victory however. www.scienceabc.com/nature/animals/lion-vs-tiger-who-do-you-think-wins-if-they-get-in-a-fight.htmlQuoted from the link. I found highlighted statement interesting after just stating Lions are born fighters.  Even though this is one endless issue with no clear answer, I put here some thoughts. Not trying to find a "winner", but I approach this matter from that perspective why this is so controversial issue with no clear answer which is only thing, which I find obvious, when seeing these discussions. So first there are experts and "experts" who have different kind of opinions, a good start for endless debate, when even experts argue. Naturally it leads to situation in which others argue too and people from different "sides" can say "but this expert said so and he/she knows". Then again that "Summing it up". ItĀ“s said there, that tiger is bigger and heavier... is it? In some averages it can be, but as captive healthy individuals show, in good conditions differences are... well, it can be asked is there any difference? Both species can produce big males weighing around 250 kg and some exceptional ones around 270-280 kg. So it can be asked where is that size and weight advantage of a tiger really, when we compare biggest individuals. I donĀ“t see it there. When taking two random individuals, sometimes lion is bigger, sometimes tiger. Again no wonder, that people argue. What comes to muscle mass, again does tiger really have more of it, I doubt it. When you have two big males, letĀ“s say 250 kg, how can anyone say, which one has more muscle mass? I havenĀ“t seen any real study giving clear answer. I know that some fanatics use some percentages, which are taken out of context, but based on what IĀ“ve seen overall, both of these biggest cats have around 60 % muscle mass when looking at total body weight, I find it quite equal situation. ThatĀ“s why I think, that when there is bigger lion than tiger, lion is overall stronger and vice versa. Tigers often have impressive looking front limbs and it most probably makes many people to forget, that overall strength means something else. Both of these biggest cats can "wrestle" with big buffalos, so when they meet each others, both have more than enough strength to push another away if one is on top of another, unless the one on top manages to get a really good bite. Then longer and sharper fangs and claws... really? Sharper in what way? Tigers have a bit longer fangs, but that pretty much is what they have and itĀ“s not some major advantage. When a lion gets a good bite, it has long enough fangs, no problem there. And that tiger would be faster? In what way? Lions are usually considered to run faster and when they fight in serious way, paw swipes are as fast as anything IĀ“ve seen from tigers. This claim can be based on kind of illusion when seeing some lions more playing than fighting. And tiger more ferocious? It can be with shorter temper but when lion is enraged, I donĀ“t see there any difference with a tiger what comes to ferocity. Some fights show that when they are irritated enough, they are brutal and relentless fighters. What comes to agility, tigers are more comfortable standing on hind legs, but does it help in serious fight when life is on stake, I doubt it. Serious fights are biting and clawing when both big cats are on ground, some paw swipes are cosmetics. Then again swimming and climbing trees. For sure tigers like more to swim, but lions can do it too. They have even fought with crocodiles while submerged and managed to get rid of the crocodile, not bad from "bad swimmer". But then again this has nothing to do with a fight between lion and tiger. Climbing trees, I think that lions climb more to trees than tigers in reality. Some lion prides even climb to rest and sleep to trees in some parts of Africa. When looking male lions and tigers, both are clumsy if/when they climb to trees. Lionesses and tigresses are more comfortable, but naturally neither of these species are no leopards and they are in best position when on ground. And then again, this also has nothing to do with fights, totally irrelevant thing to even mention in this context. Often these so called "expert opinions" are some vague statements in vague articles done by journalists, who donĀ“t know anything about these animals and they simply write, what is told to them briefly. If these journalists would know more, they would do some more questions and then they might get some more serious thinking. IĀ“ve seen some interviews and all of them have been for me just examples of bad journalism. Serious reporters, who write about politics or economy have done their research and they make questions too, not taking for granted all, what some expert tells, when they know that situation is complicated and with different kind of opinions. But these animal expert "interviews" are like: 1. "How does this kind of situation go?", 2. "Expert opinion", 3"Thank you". Personally I see lions and tigers very close call and IĀ“m not surprised at all, that people argue about this and will do it in future too. |
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jul 19, 2021 10:23:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tom on Jul 19, 2021 10:37:12 GMT -5
Interesting. More on that when I get more time. |
|
|
|
Post by tom on Jul 19, 2021 17:23:48 GMT -5
Anything is possible I guess. The Tiger Canyons reserve is over a 10 hour drive by car to Kruger National park and surrounding reserves where many of S. Africa's Lions live. That's a long way for a Lion to travel. But as I said anything is possible. It looks like the Tiger Canyons reserve is host to 19 Bengal Tigers so the chance meeting of a Lion is likely very remote and something the Wildlife officials at Tiger Canyons monitors quite closely. If Lions had moved into the reserve I'm sure they would be on top of it pronto. The other question may be if this is not a fenced reserve what would prevent the Tigers from migrating? |
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Jul 19, 2021 18:45:13 GMT -5
The tigers will choose the area which is has more trees but there might be a chance they will meet should the population increase in the years to come. One tiger might venture into the open areas and....
|
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jul 19, 2021 19:09:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by BruteStrength on Jul 19, 2021 23:54:28 GMT -5
Im not too sure who wins this fight. I think bears would defeat both of them with ease.
|
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jul 20, 2021 3:49:33 GMT -5
Im not too sure who wins this fight. I think bears would defeat both of them with ease. Yes, I agree that a Brown bear would win the vast majority of fights with either of these great cats, but not with ease. Any bear who tangles with a lion or a tiger is going to walk away with some painful injuries.  *Now, back to LION vs TIGER... |
|
|
|
Post by tom on Jul 20, 2021 7:26:02 GMT -5
Im not too sure who wins this fight. I think bears would defeat both of them with ease. Welcome back Brute.  |
|
|
|
Post by tom on Jul 20, 2021 7:43:08 GMT -5
Even though this is one endless issue with no clear answer, I put here some thoughts. Not trying to find a "winner", but I approach this matter from that perspective why this is so controversial issue with no clear answer which is only thing, which I find obvious, when seeing these discussions. So first there are experts and "experts" who have different kind of opinions, a good start for endless debate, when even experts argue. Naturally it leads to situation in which others argue too and people from different "sides" can say "but this expert said so and he/she knows". Then again that "Summing it up". ItĀ“s said there, that tiger is bigger and heavier... is it? In some averages it can be, but as captive healthy individuals show, in good conditions differences are... well, it can be asked is there any difference? Both species can produce big males weighing around 250 kg and some exceptional ones around 270-280 kg. So it can be asked where is that size and weight advantage of a tiger really, when we compare biggest individuals. I donĀ“t see it there. When taking two random individuals, sometimes lion is bigger, sometimes tiger. Again no wonder, that people argue. What comes to muscle mass, again does tiger really have more of it, I doubt it. When you have two big males, letĀ“s say 250 kg, how can anyone say, which one has more muscle mass? I havenĀ“t seen any real study giving clear answer. I know that some fanatics use some percentages, which are taken out of context, but based on what IĀ“ve seen overall, both of these biggest cats have around 60 % muscle mass when looking at total body weight, I find it quite equal situation. ThatĀ“s why I think, that when there is bigger lion than tiger, lion is overall stronger and vice versa. Tigers often have impressive looking front limbs and it most probably makes many people to forget, that overall strength means something else. Both of these biggest cats can "wrestle" with big buffalos, so when they meet each others, both have more than enough strength to push another away if one is on top of another, unless the one on top manages to get a really good bite. Then longer and sharper fangs and claws... really? Sharper in what way? Tigers have a bit longer fangs, but that pretty much is what they have and itĀ“s not some major advantage. When a lion gets a good bite, it has long enough fangs, no problem there. And that tiger would be faster? In what way? Lions are usually considered to run faster and when they fight in serious way, paw swipes are as fast as anything IĀ“ve seen from tigers. This claim can be based on kind of illusion when seeing some lions more playing than fighting. And tiger more ferocious? It can be with shorter temper but when lion is enraged, I donĀ“t see there any difference with a tiger what comes to ferocity. Some fights show that when they are irritated enough, they are brutal and relentless fighters. What comes to agility, tigers are more comfortable standing on hind legs, but does it help in serious fight when life is on stake, I doubt it. Serious fights are biting and clawing when both big cats are on ground, some paw swipes are cosmetics. Then again swimming and climbing trees. For sure tigers like more to swim, but lions can do it too. They have even fought with crocodiles while submerged and managed to get rid of the crocodile, not bad from "bad swimmer". But then again this has nothing to do with a fight between lion and tiger. Climbing trees, I think that lions climb more to trees than tigers in reality. Some lion prides even climb to rest and sleep to trees in some parts of Africa. When looking male lions and tigers, both are clumsy if/when they climb to trees. Lionesses and tigresses are more comfortable, but naturally neither of these species are no leopards and they are in best position when on ground. And then again, this also has nothing to do with fights, totally irrelevant thing to even mention in this context. Often these so called "expert opinions" are some vague statements in vague articles done by journalists, who donĀ“t know anything about these animals and they simply write, what is told to them briefly. If these journalists would know more, they would do some more questions and then they might get some more serious thinking. IĀ“ve seen some interviews and all of them have been for me just examples of bad journalism. Serious reporters, who write about politics or economy have done their research and they make questions too, not taking for granted all, what some expert tells, when they know that situation is complicated and with different kind of opinions. But these animal expert "interviews" are like: 1. "How does this kind of situation go?", 2. "Expert opinion", 3"Thank you". Personally I see lions and tigers very close call and IĀ“m not surprised at all, that people argue about this and will do it in future too. You touched on quite a few things here Shadow. Probably the only person(s) who have seen actual battles between these cats are animal trainers such as Clyde Beatty. While those were not Wild animals it's probably all we really have to go on, everything else is purely speculative. I do think that there are individuals in each specie that are more aggressive and better fighters than others. This thread is all in fun and we opened it mainly to increase some activity around here. It's an endless debate which will produce no winners. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2021 7:55:57 GMT -5
tom Yeah, I wrote a bit longer posting, because that quote which you used was, imo, a good example what kind of statements there are concerning this issue. When politician is confused, he/she gives an answer, which can answer to a lot of things, but not to question, which was asked. It looks like, some biologists etc. use a bit of same tactics. When they donĀ“t know really, they talk a lot, mostly irrelevant things and in that way cover up their wild guess to look like more valid than it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2021 9:26:17 GMT -5
tomA bit about about Beatty. If I donĀ“t remember wrongly, he has told how he used once ammonia when trying to separate fighting tiger and lion. So one time, some people have twisted this to the point, that he would have done it all the time. And if I remember right, it didnĀ“t even have any effect in the situation. Another thing is, that he has mentioned, that lions sometimes ganged up, when there was fight with tiger or tigers. This has been in some places twisted, as lions would have always ganged up which isnĀ“t what he said. But yeah, a trainer like him who had both cats in his show has to have some idea about this issue, especially when itĀ“s known, that these fights happened between his animals. It was different time back then, animals didnĀ“t have too much rights or protection from abuse etc. Anyway Beatty is a good example what comes to a person, who is often misquoted, and most likely on purpose, in different places. His overall thought was though, that lions usually beat tigers in fight, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jul 20, 2021 12:39:12 GMT -5
A bit about about Beatty... ( IMO ). This was back when sensationalism sold news papers as well as tickets to the circus. So, my thoughts, how many of the fight stories published in news papers actually happened? How many exaggerated? How many arranged, and possibly fixed? If Clyde Beatty was on the up-and-up ( honest ), then still ( IMO ) he was a very irresponsible animal trainer. Like Jim Corbett, Frank Buck, and others, he had fame and glory from working with dangerous animals. Was he courageous; hell yeah. But in my opinion, Gunther Gebel-Williams was the better big cat trainer. I will add; back in the 1960s, I used to watch a popular TV show, "Wild Kingdom." As a kid, I never gave it much thought, but, now, I do. There were way too many animal confrontations caught on camera to be mere coincidence. Example; on one episode, while filming a jaguar ( Mexico or possibly S.W. United States ), a cougar shows up. The jaguar chases off the cougar. Just a matter of minutes after this, a Mexican grizzly shows up. Marlin Perkins and Jim Fowler talk about how fortunate they are to see this rare grizzly. Then, the bear chases the jaguar from the water source. The key word: sensationalism. Edit and add: Mabel Stark, female circus wild animal trainer, chose the tiger over the lion. So, how can we place one professional big cat tamer over another? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2021 14:14:24 GMT -5
brobear When I look at Beatty, one clear fact is, that he had a lot of both, lions and tigers. And back then he got animals, which had born wild. It has increased all kind of risks what comes to taming and handling his animals. And knowing how different times were back then, I donĀ“t find it surprising that he had a lot of problems and for sure animals fought. I donĀ“t have any doubts what comes to it, that Beatty saw these fights. Another thing is that how many and how things went. One thing when looking at different kind of statements is, that what kind of experience some trainer has had. Has he/she trained only tigers or only lions etc. Has he/she seen actual fights or is opinion based on only assumptions. While Beatty can be seen in many ways, when looking at his methods from perspective of these times, his experience is undeniable. It can be discussed, that did he add some things to spice up good stories etc. I havenĀ“t seen from him anything what would look like totally imaginary and a guy like him doesnĀ“t need to make up things too much. Training animals which have born wild to be able to perform has had to have many breathtaking moments dramatic enough as they were. He was after all almost killed once and who knows how many minor "accidents" he had during the decades he worked with many animals. I would say, that people donĀ“t have to like is methods, but his experience canĀ“t be denied in any reasonable way. And it makes it very difficult to say, that some of his statements would be totally unreasonable or untrue. He is even today legend among animal trainers for a reason, not for empty bragging. If some trainer has seen one fight, it doesnĀ“t tell anything really. But if some trainer has seen several, there starts to be something. Beatty is one of those trainers, who have seen more than one fight between tigers and lions without any reasonable doubt, all things point out to it. What he says has value, imo, it canĀ“t be just dismissed as irrelevant, when talking about this kind of issue. What comes to many old and even current modern day nature documentaries, itĀ“s no secret that many times things are fixed there. Captive animals have been used and so many other things to create a scene, what they havenĀ“t been able to film in wild. People making those programs have usually budgets and deadlines, so time to time they have to be "creative". Puma, jaguar and grizzly bear in same place and same time, I would love to see it too  But only place to see them like that is a zoo.
|
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jul 21, 2021 12:23:27 GMT -5
Quote from reply #20: "Then longer and sharper fangs and claws... really? Sharper in what way? Tigers have a bit longer fangs, but that pretty much is what they have and itĀ“s not some major advantage. When a lion gets a good bite, it has long enough fangs, no problem there." Over at wildfact.com/forum/ ,GrizzlyClaws ( canine expert ), in comparing a tiger's canines with those of a brown bear, stated that the tiger's long canines are better suited for predation of large herbivores, but the thicker more deeply rooted canines of the bear are better suited for brawling. Perhaps the canine teeth of the lion and the tiger compare similarly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2021 12:47:28 GMT -5
Quote from reply #20: "Then longer and sharper fangs and claws... really? Sharper in what way? Tigers have a bit longer fangs, but that pretty much is what they have and itĀ“s not some major advantage. When a lion gets a good bite, it has long enough fangs, no problem there." Over at wildfact.com/forum/ ,GrizzlyClaws ( canine expert ), in comparing a tiger's canines with those of a brown bear, stated that the tiger's long canines are better suited for predation of large herbivores, but the thicker more deeply rooted canines of the bear are better suited for brawling. Perhaps the canine teeth of the lion and the tiger compare similarly. Sometimes picture says more than many words.   You could basically change teeth in these pictures and after that both would look just like original owners. |
|
|
|
Post by tom on Jul 21, 2021 13:36:28 GMT -5
Beautiful pictures. Yeah so the Tigers canines are slightly... longer on average, both will do the job admirably. Not an advantage IMO.
So Shadow do you buy into the notion that since Lions are born to fight meaning they are always play fighting with the rest of the cubs in the pride and even get picked on by the older cubs. In your opinion does that make them better fighters overall as adults than a Tiger?
As a young male they are cast out by the pride male(s) and essentially become nomads. One day they will have to challenge a pride male and they may lose many times before they eventually drive out the pride male or kill him to take over a pride for themselves. IN the end they become very experienced at fighting, some will just be more dominant than others for no other reason that they are better at it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2021 13:56:46 GMT -5
Beautiful pictures. Yeah so the Tigers canines are slightly... longer both will do the job admirably. Not an advantage IMO. So Shadow do you buy into the notion that since Lions are born to fight meaning they are always play fighting with the rest of the cubs in the pride and even get picked on by the older cubs that that makes them better fighters as adults? I have thought about it time to time, lions do fight a lot, there is no doubt what comes to it. As cubs and also as adults, even though many times intimidation is enough, there are a lot of real fights too. Then again all big cats go through territorial fights. I donĀ“t find it unreasonable to think, that lions are maybe most "battle hardened" big cats in wild. How big advantage it would be then is a good question. All big cats go through play fights as cubs and territorial fights as adults. It might give some slight advantage, if thinking about hypothetical situation, that a wild lion and tiger would meet. Usually knowing what needs to be done helps, no matter what we are talking about. This issue is such, which I find very difficult to make big conclusions. |
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jul 21, 2021 14:05:47 GMT -5
Slightly off topic here, but over in the old ( now dead ) forum AVA ( Animal vs Animal ), we had a very bear savvy poster called 'BigBonns'. According to him, in his opinion, there are some brown bear populations where the adult male bears fight as often as a lion, if not more so. Most of these fights are over a female or rich food resources. Also, a fight can be merely about dominance. However, Bonns noted that a lion vs lion fight was far more likely to be to the death. Brown bears rarely kill each other in these fights, although they are very serious. As for tigers...?
|
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jul 21, 2021 14:45:40 GMT -5
Quote: "....Lions are born to fight meaning they are always play fighting with the rest of the cubs in the pride...."
I have noticed for many years now the difference in kitten play and puppy play. Kittens spend most of their play time in stalking and pouncing. Puppies just run up to each other and enjoy a small amount of wrestling. Bear cubs just wrestle and in doing so they acquire skills. I would assume ( purely guessing ) that lion cubs and tiger cubs play as if a mixture of kitten and bear cub.
|
|
But only place to see them like that is a zoo.