Would you rather...

[Uchiha Barles]

Yeah, I'm gonna go with the bear for this one. It's like kraco said, tigers and other cats are like animal martial artists. They do things like go for the leg muscles, tendons and ligaments to stop you from moving, and then move in for the efficient kill. While a grizzly can weight up to 1500 lbs, and a tiger up to 650 lbs (both approximate weights), you've got to look at your fighting chances here. The tiger's more agile than the bear. I could totally see myself outmaneuvering a bear, but a tiger? Nuh uh. So, give me an 8 inch knife and a 1200 lbs grizzly, and I think I'd have a fighting chance at killing it, or getting away. Against a tiger...nuh uh.

On the hot chick vs. kid half my age thing, I'd rather go with the kid half my age. The older I get, the more sense it makes. I hate losing fights when my opponent and I are pretty much evenly matched.

[animus]

I'd still say the bear. Even with a knife, you probably won't do much against a bear with that much fat and muscle. Bears have been known to break the spine of bulls with a single maul. Now that's scary. Bears do the same, they bite the jugular first, or bite the shoulders of animals, disabling their prey. They have a pretty impressive bite strength. A 800 pound grizzly can produce approximately 1500 pounds of bite strength. I'd believe the tiger would have a similiar amount.

If we change the scenario and pit the tiger versus the bear, who would come out on top?

[Animeniax]

I'd still say the bear. Even with a knife, you probably won't do much against a bear with that much fat and muscle. Bears have been known to break the spine of bulls with a single maul. Now that's scary. Bears do the same, they bite the jugular first, or bite the shoulders of animals, disabling their prey. They have a pretty impressive bite strength. A 800 pound grizzly can produce approximately 1500 pounds of bite strength. I'd believe the tiger would have a similiar amount.

If we change the scenario and pit the tiger versus the bear, who would come out on top?

Whaaaat? When have bears and bulls ever gotten together to fight? In the jungles of Iceland or something? I think you were watching that show Animal Face-Off on Animal Planet or some shit. That or you were watching Transformers: Beast Wars and thought that shit was real.

edit: I checked the show's fights: in the Siberian tiger vs brown bear fight, the bear won as follows:

The brown bear attempted to steal the tiger's kill, not fight the tiger. The tiger tried to bite the brown bear's throat, but failed. Then, the tiger jumped up on the bear from behind and bit it on the nape. The bear finished the fight by breaking the tiger's back and biting it on the neck.

Given a grizzly is even bigger and meaner than a brown bear, that tiger is deadmeat, which means you are also dead meat, unless you can beat a tiger mano-a-mano.

[Animeniax]

Would you rather be stung by 100 wasps, or punched 100 times?

[Uchiha Barles]

Whaaaat? When have bears and bulls ever gotten together to fight? In the jungles of Iceland or something? I think you were watching that show Animal Face-Off on Animal Planet or some shit. That or you were watching Transformers: Beast Wars and thought that shit was real.

edit: I checked the show's fights: in the Siberian tiger vs brown bear fight, the bear won as follows:

Given a grizzly is even bigger and meaner than a brown bear, that tiger is deadmeat, which means you are also dead meat, unless you can beat a tiger mano-a-mano.

The tiger didn't take the bears weight into account. You, would. The tiger, on the other hand, doesn't lose much by not taking your weight into account. Your strategy against the bear is to outmaneuver him and hit him in vulnerable spots. Your strategy against the tiger is to pray you catch him in the eye as he leaps at you. While he may not bother trying to run behind you, if you try to run behind him, you'll fail.

Assuming you're talking effective punching, I'd go with wasps. The punching will for sure kill you. Even if the wasp stings would kill you, I'd probably hurt less.

Would you rather have a loyal partner in a loveless relationship, or a cheating partner in a love(ful?) relationship?

[Uchiha Barles]

Hrrrrm...I think I might actually go with the bear on this one. The only reason is that I don't know if the tiger would be thinking defensively. I doubt it would do something like move around the bear and catch it's ankles. Like, if the tiger were to attack me from the front or the rear...I don't think it makes that big of a difference, but if the tiger attacks the bear from the front, it's not going to take the bear out, and the bear can just fall on the tiger and maul it, or smash it in the skull or something.

[animus]

This stuff happens in the wild you know. There's cattle and bears all over the world, and can inhabit the same territory.

[Animeniax]

This stuff happens in the wild you know. There's cattle and bears all over the world, and can inhabit the same territory.

Like I said, you must be talking about the jungles of Iceland, where animals that inhabit completely different climate zones get together to see who's king. I think it happens once every 20 years, when the stars align and ice bridges form so the animals can make the trek to the sacred battleground.

Would you rather have a loyal partner in a loveless relationship, or a cheating partner in a love(ful?) relationship?

I'd pick loveless faith. At least she can be depended on to stick with you until you're both old and the kids have been raised and the mortgage paid.

The sex and emotion of a faithless marriage would be great for a while, then just wear you out. Plus you'll never know when that cheating partner will bail on you and the kids and the mortgage.

[Abdula]

Come on people, even if Bear beats Tiger you are no bear, and its far more likely that you will survive being attacked by a bear than being attacked by a tiger.

[Board of Command]

I think a bear would do more damage to you than a tiger.

[Abdula]

Sure but you could potentially survive a beating by a bear, but if the tiger rips your throat out, game over.

[XanBcoo]

I was going to agree with animus that a bear will do way more damage to you than a tiger, but then I recalled hearing all these stories about people surviving bear attacks and living to tell about it. Sure, they quite literally have half their faces missing, but you don't often hear about "tiger attack survivors".

Some of you are being unrealistic. I'm not going to even entertain the idea that I'd survive fighting either one. I pick the one that would kill me the fastest - the tiger.

[Board of Command]

I was going to agree with animus that a bear will do way more damage to you than a tiger, but then I recalled hearing all these stories about people surviving bear attacks and living to tell about it. Sure, they quite literally have half their faces missing, but you don't often hear about "tiger attack survivors".

You don't hear about them because you don't encounter tigers in the forest when you go camping. Tigers don't just walk around, and if you want to encounter one, you have to buy a ticket to the zoo.

[Animeniax]

You don't hear about them because you don't encounter tigers in the forest when you go camping. Tigers don't just walk around, and if you want to encounter one, you have to buy a ticket to the zoo.

Yeah, like those two pakistani brothers and their mexican friend in that one zoo incident.

This is like asking would you rather fight a buff and skilled roman gladiator or fight a skilled ninja.

I would rather fight the ninja, cause you won't even see it coming. Has to be better than a gladiator rushing at you.

[python862]

Some of you are being unrealistic. I'm not going to even entertain the idea that I'd survive fighting either one. I pick the one that would kill me the fastest - the tiger.

I remember saying something like this.

[animus]

Especially since most tigers are endangered. Bears are tenacious beasts. They eat everything, hibernate during the winter where food is scarce (improving chances of survival), so their population is on the high side. And according to wikipedia, they're apparently somewhat intelligent, being halfway between a primate and dogs on a scale.

[Board of Command]

Not to mention, a grizzly bear has much greater muscle mass than a tiger. They can stand on two legs and maul you with their front legs, while tigers can only stay on all fours and swipe at you.

[Buffalobiian]

Not to mention, a grizzly bear has much greater muscle mass than a tiger. They can stand on two legs and maul you with their front legs, while tigers can only stay on all fours and swipe at you.

But is that really such a disadvantage? I'm not sure if bears can dodge side to side, but I'm pretty sure tigers can. And pounces really kill. We can talk after surviving that.

[Board of Command]

Why would a bear or tiger need to dodge you? They're never going to be on the defensive. In fact, you don't even want to land any hits on them because that would only infuriate them more, giving them ATK +5.

[Buffalobiian]

Why would a bear or tiger need to dodge you? They're never going to be on the defensive. In fact, you don't even want to land any hits on them because that would only infuriate them more, giving them ATK +5.

We're assuming that you're both after each other. You can't run away, so you'll have to take it down. As for why a bear or tiger would need to dodge, they're not invincible. I don't know if we're talking about unarmed combat, but in the case of the guy with the nice above, the bear dodged some of his knife slashes.