|
Post by brobear on May 22, 2020 5:22:04 GMT -5
Within just about every face-off debate there comes up the issue of whether or not an ambush attack can be considered as an animal face-off scenario. Any thoughts, ideas, or personal opinions on this subject?
|
|
|
Post by tom on May 22, 2020 5:59:53 GMT -5
No. Face-offs are IMO where both animals are in plain sight and or completely aware of each other's presence.
|
|
|
Post by tom on May 22, 2020 6:02:34 GMT -5
That being said, an ambush can become a face off should the element of surprise be lost before the attack begins.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on May 22, 2020 8:15:41 GMT -5
No. Face-offs are IMO where both animals are in plain sight and or completely aware of each other's presence. True ( IMO ) if they meet face-to-face, and there is a fight, no matter how tricky one might be, its a face-off. However ( IMO ) if one is ambushed, and then manages to break free, after that, no matter how the fight goes, this fight remains an ambush.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on May 22, 2020 9:15:47 GMT -5
Some ambush predators can be good fighters too. For examples cats have more weapons than canines and would win in fights even at parity.
The bulkier bears however are stronger and better fighters than big cats even at weight parity.The winner between bear and big cats at weight parity is debatable.
At size parity, bears beats big cats more often not in fights.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2020 9:39:02 GMT -5
If a tiger ambushes a grizzly bear and fails to secure the killing the bite and gets pushed off its body but continues to stay and fight and manages to kill the bear head on, would you still consider this an ambush or relatively fair?
|
|
|
Post by brobear on May 22, 2020 10:06:13 GMT -5
If a tiger ambushes a grizzly bear and fails to secure the killing the bite and gets pushed off its body but continues to stay and fight and manages to kill the bear head on, would you still consider this an ambush or relatively fair? However ( IMO ) if one is ambushed, and then manages to break free, after that, no matter how the fight goes, this fight remains an ambush. *I have 2 reasons for this: I'm using tiger and grizzly as example here: if the tiger ambushes the bear, the tiger has already prepared himself mentally for this confrontation. The bear, on the other-hand, has been taken completely by surprise. Its like waking-up from a deep sleep and finding yourself in a fight for your life. Reason number #2: In his initial attack, even if the bear manages to throw the tiger clear from himself, the bear has already received some wounds from the tiger's claws and possibly from his teeth. Therefore ( IMHO ) what starts out as an ambush remains an ambush.
|
|
|
Post by tom on May 22, 2020 10:33:39 GMT -5
If a tiger ambushes a grizzly bear and fails to secure the killing the bite and gets pushed off its body but continues to stay and fight and manages to kill the bear head on, would you still consider this an ambush or relatively fair? However ( IMO ) if one is ambushed, and then manages to break free, after that, no matter how the fight goes, this fight remains an ambush. *I have 2 reasons for this: I'm using tiger and grizzly as example here: if the tiger ambushes the bear, the tiger has already prepared himself mentally for this confrontation. The bear, on the other-hand, has been taken completely by surprise. Its like waking-up from a deep sleep and finding yourself in a fight for your life. Reason number #2: In his initial attack, even if the bear manages to throw the tiger clear from himself, the bear has already received some wounds from the tiger's claws and possibly from his teeth. Therefore ( IMHO ) what starts out as an ambush remains an ambush. I think the keyword here is break free. If this is the case I agree it's still considered an ambush because initially the bear was completely caught off guard. If the element of surprise was lost just prior to the initial attack then this where I would consider it a face off.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on May 22, 2020 10:37:00 GMT -5
No. Face-offs are IMO where both animals are in plain sight and or completely aware of each other's presence. I agree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2020 10:44:16 GMT -5
However ( IMO ) if one is ambushed, and then manages to break free, after that, no matter how the fight goes, this fight remains an ambush. *I have 2 reasons for this: I'm using tiger and grizzly as example here: if the tiger ambushes the bear, the tiger has already prepared himself mentally for this confrontation. The bear, on the other-hand, has been taken completely by surprise. Its like waking-up from a deep sleep and finding yourself in a fight for your life. Reason number #2: In his initial attack, even if the bear manages to throw the tiger clear from himself, the bear has already received some wounds from the tiger's claws and possibly from his teeth. Therefore ( IMHO ) what starts out as an ambush remains an ambush. I think the keyword here is break free. If this is the case I agree it's still considered an ambush because initially the bear was completely caught off guard. If the element of surprise was lost just prior to the initial attack then this where I would consider it a face off. So if the bear was stalking the bear and the bear noticed, it's now a face off?
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on May 22, 2020 10:45:49 GMT -5
In an animal vs animal debate, a successful ambush is when the animal attacked dies within seconds or a few minutes at most. This is what the attacker wanted and accomplished. There was no struggle, no fight, the victim had no chance at all. Its just a killing, not a fight.
But sometimes the ambush fails and there it becomes a head on fight. The key here is knowing how hurt the victim was of the initial ambush attack, if it was a serious injury, then yeah, you can attribute the kill because of the ambush mostly. But if the victim was not hurt at all or barely hurt, then it becomes a mostly fair face to face fight.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on May 22, 2020 10:56:11 GMT -5
You mean if the tiger was stalking the bear. Well, most times, when the bear notices the tiger, the tiger runs away, there is no face off.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on May 22, 2020 10:56:19 GMT -5
Quote: But sometimes the ambush fails and there it becomes a head on fight. *I wholeheartedly disagree. If the ambusher catches the ambushee unaware, making any physical contact with the ambushee; this is a successful ambush. What happens after the ambushee has been *touched by the ambusher does not change the fact that this is an ambush. *Remember ( again using tiger and bear as examples ) the tiger has prepared himself mentally for this confrontation. The bear is taken by surprise. Thus: not a face-off.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on May 22, 2020 11:02:33 GMT -5
I understand what you mean, its just a game of words though. Yes, even if the victim is not hurt at all, it started as an ambush, but as far as the important event on our hands, the actual fight, that did not affect so in animal debates its considered a fair face to face fight. In animal fights, if the victim did not die or was not hurt during the initial ambush attack, this is considered a "failed ambush".
|
|
|
Post by brobear on May 22, 2020 11:14:10 GMT -5
Once a bear has been ambushed by a tiger ( example ) the bear is at that point wounded ( I can assure you ). Also ( as stated ) the bewildered bear is taken by surprise. *When two professional boxers step into the ring, each one as prepared as the other - that is a face-off. If I were to quietly walk up to you from behind, you turn around because you "might have heard something" and I punch you in the mouth - that is an ambush. If we fight; it was still an ambush.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on May 22, 2020 11:25:46 GMT -5
We agree brobear. In most ambushes, the subadult and female bears die in seconds with a bite to the base of the neck. Those bears had no chance to fight back. If the bear notices the tiger before this happens, we know for a fact that the tiger runs away, there is no fight. And this is why we barely have any documented fair face to face fights in the wild, because the tiger chooses when to "fight" (ambush).
|
|
|
Post by brobear on May 22, 2020 11:56:37 GMT -5
We agree brobear. In most ambushes, the subadult and female bears die in seconds with a bite to the base of the neck. Those bears had no chance to fight back. If the bear notices the tiger before this happens, we know for a fact that the tiger runs away, there is no fight. And this is why we barely have any documented fair face to face fights in the wild, because the tiger chooses when to "fight" (ambush). Exactly. As Tom said: That being said, an ambush can become a face off should the element of surprise be lost before the attack begins. But we know that once the tiger loses this element of surprise; he will relinquish the attack. Therefore, a face-off between a tiger and a full-grown bear is extremely rare. And I use that word extreme to the extreme!
|
|
|
Post by tom on May 22, 2020 12:36:28 GMT -5
I think the keyword here is break free. If this is the case I agree it's still considered an ambush because initially the bear was completely caught off guard. If the element of surprise was lost just prior to the initial attack then this where I would consider it a face off. So if the bear was stalking the bear and the bear noticed, it's now a face off? Ok if you want to use two Bears. Stalking is the lead up to an ambush. The Stalkie may wind the stalker without seeing him but knows he's in the vicinity. In this case he's aware of the other predators presence. He still feasibly could be ambushed but it will now be a whole lot more difficult because you've been busted. What I meant in the quote above was this. Lets say a Tiger was stalking an unsuspecting Bear who was just foraging and going about his business. The wind was in the Tigers favor as Tigers are likely to come in upwind anyway. Lets say the Tiger has maneuvered to a position upwind in a brushy area within 25 yards of the Bear who does not at this point suspect anything. As the Tiger realizes this is his chance he slowly creeps to a position to pounce he snaps a tiny little twig. It makes a very.... slight sound but the Bears hears it and turns toward the sound and sees Tiger ready to attack. This is where the ambush is no longer an ambush and becomes a face-off IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by tom on May 22, 2020 12:41:05 GMT -5
If the bear notices the tiger before this happens, we know for a fact that the tiger runs away, there is no fight. Yeah if were talking Tiger and Amur Brown Bear the Tiger once busted probably loses his stomach for a fight.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on May 22, 2020 12:43:39 GMT -5
I tied some of this together to create a post in a debate concerning tigers and wild boar - Quote: Face-offs are ( IMO ) where both animals are in plain sight and or completely aware of each other's presence. True ( IMO ) if they meet face-to-face, and there is a fight, no matter how tricky one might be, its a face-off. However ( IMO ) if one is ambushed, and then manages to break free, after that, no matter how the fight goes, this fight remains an ambush. *I have 2 reasons for this: I'm using tiger and grizzly as example here: if the tiger ambushes the bear, the tiger has already prepared himself mentally for this confrontation. The bear, on the other-hand, has been taken completely by surprise. Its like waking-up from a deep sleep and finding yourself in a fight for your life. Reason number #2: In his initial attack, even if the bear manages to throw the tiger clear from himself, the bear has already received some wounds from the tiger's claws and possibly from his teeth. Therefore ( IMHO ) what starts out as an ambush remains an ambush. That being said, an ambush can become a face off should the element of surprise be lost before the attack begins.
|
|