|
Post by brobear on Jan 4, 2022 5:33:33 GMT -5
Size matters. This is true. I any given wild animal face-off debate, size is one of several main advantages one beast can have over the other. However, very often a poster will place everything on the heaviest opponent. If weight truly determined a winner, then rather than have a boxing match or a wrestling match, why not instead have each athlete stand on a scale and then pronounce the heaviest fighter as the winner? Size and weight are indeed substantial advantages, but not necessarily a game changer except when to the extreme. Example; a fox would stand no chance against a tiger. Likewise, a tiger would stand no chance going head-to-head against a big tusker bull elephant. But, in a fight between a 40-pound wolverine and a 100-pound grey wolf I would not wager either way. Such a confrontation could easily end with either opponent lying dead in the snow.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Jan 4, 2022 15:58:48 GMT -5
I think wolverine vs Wolf is a bit of a steelmate. The wolf is too big for a wolverine to kill but the latter is a better grappler and fighter all round.
|
|