|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 8, 2013 0:46:09 GMT 5
Weaponry is roughly equal as bear have claws to shovel out debris and flesh. Added the tiger may have a superior skull but the bear will be using his a lot more. Bears bite more times, have a higher R-Shift which means increased shearing power. Are more robust meaning their bones are less likely to break or similar from a tigers attack. Their loose skin makes it unlikely a tiger will slice them up with their claws. And bears have a superior fighting style plus greater grappling ability along with a wider more robust frame. They fight in a bipedal stance and throw their weight around knocking and thrashing their opponents. Therefore if the tiger wants to grapple it would be fighting on the bears terms which would ultimately be its demise. You seem to have basically said the tiger has superior weaponry. And last I checked longer and thicker canines are a hinderance rather than an advantage as it limits how rapidly you can bite. No, weaponry is clearly in favor of the Tiger. Bears have long claws, but they are like shovels. The damage large Bears dish out with pawswipes relies on power rather than claws. Tigers bite far more often than Bears in a fight, Bears actually wrestle a lot more than bite. Tigers' longer canines mean that its bite will dig deeper than the Bear - more evidence of superior weaponry, add that to the fact that all of the Tiger's tools are sharper, it's a no-contest in weaponry. Bears are not better grapplers actually, Tigers are better grapplers. They have sharper and retractile claws which help them dig deep and cling on to prey animals much better than the shovel claws Bears have. Tigers also have a greater rotational ability of the paw, and they have shorter and stockier limbs which provide them with greater power. Lastly, although Bears are durable animals, their tolerance to pain and injury is overestimated. They are no more durable than Tigers, and the Tiger would have no problem puncturing the Bears hide, it's happened lots of times. Uh no, weaponry is not clearly in favor of the tiger. Unlike tigers bears use their claws to heave out chunks of dirt and rocks from the ground and to fight. A bear hammering you with its claws will do more damage then the claws of a tiger which mainly are only used to grip their prey because bears claws shovel out stuff. Tiger claws do not, and added the claws of a bear are much longer and broader and basically all around bigger. That coupled with the bears greater grappling ability and fighting style would allow it to overwhelm the tiger which will be at a disadvantage. And no, I'm sure you seen when bears fight, they bite more than cats and they shake to throw their opponent off balance from a bipedal position if te tiger tried to grapple a bear it would have to fight on the bears terms, this of course should be common sense that the cat will then be at a huge disadvantage, Tigers are precision biters, bear are not as seen here in this dominance fight. Also a word of advice, just say a cats claws are sharper as being "retractable" isn't anything close to an advantage as tiger do not constantly use their retraction tendons in their toes to sheathe their claws when fighting. Saying they are just sharper would save me the time of telling you this. Once again added that a tiger is a precison biter weaponry once again is not in its favor as it would try to place a precise bite unlike the bear who will just bite anywhere. Added to the fact the tiger would have to fight on the bears terms to evn get at the throat it once again is putting itself at a disadvantage. Bears are better grappler due to more flexible limbs and fighting in a bipedal position. The claws of cats help them hold onto prey. Holding is not the same thing as grappling mkay? Ursus Arctos already debunked tiger having shorter stockier limbs. I rememer him doing so quite clearly, hell I can even go get his info from the thread on carnivora. Bear are the shorter, stockier legged anmal and they infact have greater paw rotation. I don't know why you keep reverting to saying the cat has these advantges..... I never said a tiger couldn't puncture a bears hide. But the claws of a cat don't puncture now do they? They aren't stabbing weapons and mammal evolved thick loose ur to bypass the effects of claw injuries, ence why you rarely ever see a bear ripped apart or anything from a tiger attack. As a fighter the tiger is simply outclassed by the brown bear. |
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Jun 8, 2013 0:46:42 GMT 5
Tigers also have a greater rotational ability of the paw, and they have shorter and stockier limbs which provide them with greater power. Hasn't Black Ice once (in September 2012 or so) said that bears had shorter limbs? |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 8, 2013 0:51:44 GMT 5
Tigers also have a greater rotational ability of the paw, and they have shorter and stockier limbs which provide them with greater power. Hasn't Black Ice once (in September 2012 or so) said that bears had shorter limbs? Yea Ursus Arctos had called vod out on that. Ima find the link again. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 8, 2013 0:58:40 GMT 5
Uh, no, this is from Taipan.  This suggests lion>brownie in rotational ability of the paw. From “Building a Mammalian Superpredator” by Stephen Wroe:  In my opinion the most interesting value above is “Rt/Re”. This value is for the mechanical advantage of the bicep muscle. If two animals have equally powerful biceps, and one has a higher Rt/Re value, it will be able to flex the end of it's radius with greater force. This also once again means that when it comes to flexing, the relative force at the paws is overestimated for felines (as they have an additional length of limb segments). The values are log(x+1), where x is the actual ratio. Therefore, to find x, we must simply do 10^value - 1. So the values are: Sun bear: 0.17219536554813046614559376200578 American black bear: 0.17489755493952954172206776512684 Brown bear: 0.15611224219209884832575567525884 Lion: 0.16680961706096251647088848858969 Jaguar: 0.2078138351067801926325889031707 Leopard: 0.16949939101987098193722100197643 Bears and big cats appear to be overall fairly similar in this value, but all these large felines have greater mechanical advantage of the biceps than the brown bear, suggesting that they have greater pulling ability given equally sized biceps (if the extra length of their additional limb segments doesn't deflate the functional value). Bears and big cats appear to be overall fairly similar in this value, but all these large felines have greater mechanical advantage of the biceps than the brown bear, suggesting that they may have greater pulling ability given equally sized biceps (if the extra length of their additional limb segments doesn't deflate the functional value).  The data from “Ecomorphology...Arctodus”. The difference in tibia/femur is very large, and doesn't really come close to featuring any overlap between the bear's values and that of the lions or tigers. It is also interesting to note that Arcotodus, a less cursorial animal than the modern brown bear also has less grappling ability for it's size; less cursorial does not mean a better grappler as that example demonstrates. Black Ice, all that stuff about the Brown Bear being physically superior and a better fighter than a Tiger isn't correct.  |
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38 
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 8, 2013 1:00:04 GMT 5
animalsversesanimals.yuku.com/topic/2144/Different-AgeSex-classes-of-brown-bears#.UbI7SOdJPMA The growth rate of bears is much slower than that of the big cats. A male grizzly is sexually mature at age 4.5 years. He is still an adolescent at age 8.5 years. Even though the male grizzly is considered as fully adult at age 8.5 years, he is still growing. The male grizzly will continue to grow, not only in fat but in muscle and bones until he is from 12 to 15 years old. Your alpha male grizzly bears are normally 12+ years old.
When field biologists perform their studies on bear populations, they randomly capture bears, give each a physical, then measure and weigh. Such studies are not for the purpose of finding the average size of the bears. By far, the majority of male bears captured are adolescent bears. The average size given for adult male grizzly bears include bears no more than 5 years old. In fact, more by far than alpha male grizzlies. I firmly believe that the average fully adult ( 12+ years ) mountain male grizzly is the same size as the Russian grizzly or the Japanese grizzly.
Finding an average for the grizzly is extremely complicated. Each population is different. As explained, no study has ever been performed as to finding the actual size of fully adult boars. Then, we must consider the seasons. Like the Russian grizzly, the average mountain alpha male grizzly is likely roughly 582 pounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 8, 2013 1:02:23 GMT 5
Uh, no, this is from Taipan. This suggests lion>brownie in rotational ability of the paw. From “Building a Mammalian Superpredator” by Stephen Wroe: In my opinion the most interesting value above is “Rt/Re”. This value is for the mechanical advantage of the bicep muscle. If two animals have equally powerful biceps, and one has a higher Rt/Re value, it will be able to flex the end of it's radius with greater force. This also once again means that when it comes to flexing, the relative force at the paws is overestimated for felines (as they have an additional length of limb segments). The values are log(x+1), where x is the actual ratio. Therefore, to find x, we must simply do 10^value - 1. So the values are: Sun bear: 0.17219536554813046614559376200578 American black bear: 0.17489755493952954172206776512684 Brown bear: 0.15611224219209884832575567525884 Lion: 0.16680961706096251647088848858969 Jaguar: 0.2078138351067801926325889031707 Leopard: 0.16949939101987098193722100197643 Bears and big cats appear to be overall fairly similar in this value, but all these large felines have greater mechanical advantage of the biceps than the brown bear, suggesting that they have greater pulling ability given equally sized biceps (if the extra length of their additional limb segments doesn't deflate the functional value). Bears and big cats appear to be overall fairly similar in this value, but all these large felines have greater mechanical advantage of the biceps than the brown bear, suggesting that they may have greater pulling ability given equally sized biceps (if the extra length of their additional limb segments doesn't deflate the functional value). The data from “Ecomorphology...Arctodus”. The difference in tibia/femur is very large, and doesn't really come close to featuring any overlap between the bear's values and that of the lions or tigers. It is also interesting to note that Arcotodus, a less cursorial animal than the modern brown bear also has less grappling ability for it's size; less cursorial does not mean a better grappler as that example demonstrates. Black Ice, all that stuff about the Brown Bear being physically superior and a better fighter than a Tiger isn't correct. debunked by Ursus Arctos more recent studies  In this thread on page 14 or around that (Im banned so I had to use a proxy) 7.hidemyass.com/ip-1/encoded/Oi8vY2Fybml2b3JhZm9ydW0uY29tL3RvcGljLzkzODAxMzIvMTcvAnd there was more info on another thread involving bears.... oh wait I know! BRB |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 8, 2013 1:03:12 GMT 5
Already covered. A study shown a long time ago in Carnivore forum has already proven that adult, male +12 year old Grizzly Bears from Yellowstone average 490 pounds. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 8, 2013 1:05:31 GMT 5
Uh, no, this is from Taipan. This suggests lion>brownie in rotational ability of the paw. From “Building a Mammalian Superpredator” by Stephen Wroe: In my opinion the most interesting value above is “Rt/Re”. This value is for the mechanical advantage of the bicep muscle. If two animals have equally powerful biceps, and one has a higher Rt/Re value, it will be able to flex the end of it's radius with greater force. This also once again means that when it comes to flexing, the relative force at the paws is overestimated for felines (as they have an additional length of limb segments). The values are log(x+1), where x is the actual ratio. Therefore, to find x, we must simply do 10^value - 1. So the values are: Sun bear: 0.17219536554813046614559376200578 American black bear: 0.17489755493952954172206776512684 Brown bear: 0.15611224219209884832575567525884 Lion: 0.16680961706096251647088848858969 Jaguar: 0.2078138351067801926325889031707 Leopard: 0.16949939101987098193722100197643 Bears and big cats appear to be overall fairly similar in this value, but all these large felines have greater mechanical advantage of the biceps than the brown bear, suggesting that they have greater pulling ability given equally sized biceps (if the extra length of their additional limb segments doesn't deflate the functional value). Bears and big cats appear to be overall fairly similar in this value, but all these large felines have greater mechanical advantage of the biceps than the brown bear, suggesting that they may have greater pulling ability given equally sized biceps (if the extra length of their additional limb segments doesn't deflate the functional value). The data from “Ecomorphology...Arctodus”. The difference in tibia/femur is very large, and doesn't really come close to featuring any overlap between the bear's values and that of the lions or tigers. It is also interesting to note that Arcotodus, a less cursorial animal than the modern brown bear also has less grappling ability for it's size; less cursorial does not mean a better grappler as that example demonstrates. Black Ice, all that stuff about the Brown Bear being physically superior and a better fighter than a Tiger isn't correct. debunked In this thread on page 14 or around that (Im banned so I had to use a proxy) 7.hidemyass.com/ip-1/encoded/Oi8vY2Fybml2b3JhZm9ydW0uY29tL3RvcGljLzkzODAxMzIvMTcvI can't read that website, it says access denied. |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 8, 2013 1:06:49 GMT 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 8, 2013 1:08:18 GMT 5
Already covered. A study shown a long time ago in Carnivore forum has already proven that adult, male +12 year old Grizzly Bears from Yellowstone average 490 pounds. Damn i forgot we both are banned lol, try copying and pasting the link in an anonymous proxy server like zend2.com |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 8, 2013 1:11:00 GMT 5
Nope, I actually remember besting you in the ultimate debate contests we used to have. Limb strength:  Ursus arctos = 88,4 % - Ursus americanus = 90,3 %  Tiger = 82.4 Lion = 89.5 On average big cats have a shorter humerus than bears. So what does this mean? The example shows that tigers had the largest humerus relative to the radius and the bears had the shortest. So the cats relatively longer humerus and short radius give them a leverage advantage. Read this...  |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 8, 2013 1:17:23 GMT 5
Nope, I actually remember besting you in the ultimate debate contests we used to have. Limb strength: Ursus arctos = 88,4 % - Ursus americanus = 90,3 % Tiger = 82.4 Lion = 89.5 On average big cats have a shorter humerus than bears. So what does this mean? The example shows that tigers had the largest humerus relative to the radius and the bears had the shortest. So the cats relatively longer humerus and short radius give them a leverage advantage. Read this... Everything I posted debunks all that. You can't read the links really? i see em fine when i click on them. (Note the thread i just posted was done long after that ultimate debate) The stuff reddhole (now Red Dog) posted was very recent. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 8, 2013 4:17:11 GMT 5
Actually, my first post has been proven wrong before, but my second post hasn't; it's new data and information which I didn't even have back in 2012.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 8, 2013 4:19:42 GMT 5
Ha, that's like 5% of the total data available on Felines vs Bears. Cherry-picking much? |
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 8, 2013 5:37:46 GMT 5
Vodmeister says: A study shown a long time ago in Carnivore forum has already proven that adult, male +12 year old Grizzly Bears from Yellowstone average 490 pounds.
I seriously doubt that because no study has *ever been done and 600+ pound grizzly are commonplace. However, rather than an endless argument, I will go along with a not-so-big male grizzly at 490 pounds. That is 50 pounds heavier than the biggest bear ever known to be killed by a tiger - and a boar. Remember also, the only fight ever witnessed ( reliable witness ) was in 1943 Amur River. The grizzly killed the tiger. I have absolutely no doubt that the grizzly would defeat the Bengal tiger in at least 75% of face-off encounters.
|
|
