Bear vs Dinosaur

[brobear]

Looks to me to be a mismatch. It would be, by appearances, a miracle if the bear killed the dinosaur.

[brobear]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inostrancevia 
  
( don't know how to add the voting table ).  

The species in Inostrancevia were the largest gorgonopsids known; known individuals have total body lengths reaching up to 3.5 m (11.5 ft) and long, narrow skulls up to 60 cm (24 in) long. This animal had an average mass of 300 kg (661.3 lbs).
                                                                                                                            

[Deleted]

I wouldn't call this a mismatch by any means. The bear is the same mass as the dinosaur and has sufficient weaponry not to get slaughtered on the spot - if it looks like a mismatch I would suggest checking the note I put.

[theundertaker45]

I generally haven't made my mind fully up on bear/theropod matchups at parity, however, it seems that the dinosaur has the advantage regarding hindlimb stability whereas the bear has much more robust forelimbs. The bear will most likely also be the physically stronger contestant of the two due to its bulk. Generally speaking, the bear has to control the Yutyrannus' head in order to win this fight but I don't know whether it would play out like this most of the time or not.

[Deleted]

theundertaker45

I would expect the strength discrepancy to be minimal if not non-existent. Tyrannosaurs are fairly bulky as well, and I don't know if in a wrestling contest the bear would be able to use its strength as efficiently as the dinosaur due to the inferior stability.
Regarding the bear controlling the dinosaur's head, you may want to consider this, quoted from Sorkin (2008): Ecomorphology of the giant short-faced bears Agriotherium and Arctodus.

"Both A. africanum and A. simus appear to havebeen inferior to both the big cats and the brown bearin their ability to subdue large terrestrial mammals,upon which the latter preys more frequently than anyother living ursid (Nowak 1999). The deltoid andpectoral ridges of the humerus terminated moreproximally in the giant short-faced bears than in thebrown bear (Figures 11(A), (B), (D) and 12). Thissuggests more proximal insertions and, therefore,reduced leverage of the deltoid and pectoralismuscles (based on Davis (1964)), both of whichare crucial to the big cats’ ability to subdue largeprey (Turner and Anto´n 1997). The supinator(lateral epicondylar) ridge of the humerus was lessprominent in A. africanum and A. simus than in thebrown bear (Merriam and Stock 1925; Figure 11(A),(B), (D)). This suggests reduced development of thebrachialis and brachioradialis muscles, which orig-inate on that ridge and flex and supinate (in the caseof the brachioradialis) the forearm in bears (Davis1964)—motions that are crucial to grasping a largeprey animal with the forepaws (based on Turner andAnto´n (1997)).The medial epicondyle of the humerus was also lessprominent in the giant short-faced bears than in eitherthe brown bear or a big cat, such as the tiger(Figure 11(A), (B), (D), (E)). This suggests reduceddevelopment of the pronator teres muscle as well as theflexors of the wrist and digits (palmaris longus, flexorcarpi radialis, flexor carpi ulnaris, and flexor digitorumprofundus muscles), which originate on that epicondylein both bears and cats (Davis 1964; Crouch and Lackey1969). Therefore, the pronation of the forearm and theflexion of the wrist and digits, all of which are crucial tograsping a large prey animal with the forepaws (based onTurner and Anto´n (1997)), were probably less powerfulin A. africanum and A. simus than in either the brownbear or a big cat"

[OldGreenGrolar]

Inostrancevia has the deadlier jaws but a cave bear has superior grappling ability with more felxible forearms of its own.

[OldGreenGrolar]

The megalosaurs looks larger once again but they are probably the same weight.

[theundertaker45]

That's interesting; it appears to me that the short-faced bear might not be the best ursid to take on the dinosaur. However, I duly believe that there would be quite a discrepancy in terms of strength; the dinosaur is much longer/taller at weight parity which signals to me that it lacks robusticity/strength compared to the bear; the bear's whole build is concentrated on density/strength whereas the theropod has its focus on agility/speed.

[OldGreenGrolar]

"Both A. africanum and A. simus appear to havebeen inferior to both the big cats and the brown bear in their ability to subdue large terrestrial mammals,upon which the latter preys more frequently than anyother living ursid (Nowak 1999)

I believe they have forgotten to include the polar bear which has slightly better grappling ability than the brown bear and way better in grappling as well as larger and stronger than any big cat.

The polar bear is probably included under brown bear, however, as the former existed only because of the leader.

[Deleted]

Sept 3, 2020 12:09:47 GMT -5 theundertaker45 said:

1: the dinosaur is much longer/taller at weight parity which signals to me that it lacks robusticity/strength compared to the bear;
2: the bear's whole build is concentrated on density/strength whereas the theropod has its focus on agility/speed.

1: Being longer and taller at weight parity don't really have anything to do with robusticity; the extra length is due to the proportionally larger head and neck as well as the counterbalancing tail, neither of which really contribute towards build or strength at all. If you take a look at the torsos of both (which is by far the most important contributor to mass), you will notice they are very similar in size and shape and therefore of similar robusticity and strength.
2: As noted above, they are of roughly equivalent robusticity in the most important contributor towards mass. What you are referring to moreso suggests to me that out of 2 animals of similar strength, one is more cursorial than the other.

[King Kodiak]

I voted for the Yutyrannus. Seeing the comparison at the first post, i really dont see how the bear can win.

[brobear]

Sept 3, 2020 10:41:07 GMT -5 @grizzlyfan245 said:

I wouldn't call this a mismatch by any means. The bear is the same mass as the dinosaur and has sufficient weaponry not to get slaughtered on the spot - if it looks like a mismatch I would suggest checking the note I put.

Oh; I read it all. But the dinosaur has a reach advantage. It looks to me like the bear might have a really hard time getting into close quarters where he needs to be to win. Weight-parity does not always produce an even match ( IMO ). 

[King Kodiak]

What kind of match up is this? Lmao. The bear stands zero chance, the Megalosaurus has a much longer head and body length and its taller at the shoulder. It would just bite the poor bear's head off.

[King Kodiak]

Brobear: imagine if we had a match "Megalosaurus vs Siberian tiger", who would you think "certain" tiger fangirls would vote for? Hahahaha.

[Deleted]

Yep. LOL.

[brobear]

I consider that predatory dinosaurs held that bipedal bird-like posture for nearly 300-million years and it never really changed. None of them evolved back to being quadrupeds. It obviously served them well. A fight against a carnivorous dinosaur at weight-parity is putting a bear into a perilous position. ( IMO ).

[Deleted]

Apparently Inostrancevia was capable of grappling with its own arms to a degree. However, its arms are proportionally quite a bit shorter than those of the cave bear, and it does not seem to be much more big headed either. Of course, it does have very large fangs and its bite is still deadlier than that of the bear's.

I would probably go with the bear on the basis that it seems easier for it to outgrapple both the head and the short arms of the gorgonopsid than it is for the gorgonopsid to outgrapple or outbite the bear.

[brobear]

I agree with all said. I figure that the gorgonopsid is confined to fighting while on all-fours. I doubt he had any bipedal ability. His head appears ( comparatively ) large for his body size. His mouth quite large and teeth; pretty-much a saber-toothed predator. So, I figure his bite much more deadly while his grappling ability far less than the bear.

[Deleted]

Could not find the author for the bear but the Hyaenodon is from Prehistoric Fauna. Both the bear and Hyaenodon are 250 kg each.

[Deleted]

Could not find the author for the bear but Afrovenator is from PaleoGeekSquared. Both the bear and the Afrovenator are 700 kg each.

Here are also a comparison of their skulls at parity. Could not find the author for the bear but the Afrovenator is modified from paleofile.com.