Wild Animal Fights

The lion would win because the are almost equal in size and strength but both are animal that go for a fast kill whick the will probably go for the leaving the lion the victor because its mane.

I feel the Lion would win (given the same basic size and strength), because the Lion has so much more competition in Africa, than the Tiger has in India. The territory of Lion Prides tends to overlap for food and water. The competition is also fierce for Pride “Take-Over’s” as well as from other predators such as ferocious Hyenas. In comparison, a Tiger’s life in India is almost domestic.

Thats true but the tiger is not only found in india it is found all over the world.

I say tiger its bigger and fight bigger animals brown,black and sloth bear which are bigger and stronger than hyenas lions only fight hyena which aren't really that dangerous to an adult lions but most like if the lion and the tiger meet it would like 2,3,4 lions vs 1 poor tiger, but on one on one i support tiger mainly 5-7/10 for the tiger.

No im sorry the lion would win it.It has more competition where it lives i dont have time to name them off but the lion would win.

The tiger is bigger, stronger, more ferocious and able to kill larger animals such as bears in comparison to the lion. one on one the tiger would have the edge over the lion. 
However, the frustrated tiger wouldnt be able to grab the lion in a choke hold because of its mane. The lion would more likely die of its injuries but the tiger would be pretty beat up aswell. 
If a tiger were to fight a maneless male lion (rare disease), the tiger would kill the lion every time.

The tiger as more competition because he lives by himself. Dhole dogs are more likely to fight tigers because they are only fighting one tiger but never lions because lions have back up and this back up can be up to 20 individuals. And tiger like Sam said fight bears and 3 different kinds including brown bears, both lions and tigers live with elephants, rhinos and leopards. Lions know buffalo but tigers know guar which are bigger and more dangerous than cape buffalo and both cats know crocs. But the tiger would still win he would take a beating yes but he would more likely be the victor. 
Also the tigers competition is bigger and stronger than those of lions.

Hmm. I 'like' the tiger more than the lion but I think the latter would actually win. The tiger is larger and heavier on average but I suspect that the lion has more muscle mass proportionally - its body shape resembles the jaguar which is reputedly the strongest (pound-for-pound) of the big cats. The mane provides it with some protection from the throat bite too. However my main argument is experience - as far as I know lions are much more social and often have to assert their place in the pack against other males, so they are more used to fighting other large cats. This would probably give it an edge.

Guys sorry for the double post but anyone who is interested in this fight has to read this post 
 
 
 
http://indrajit.wordpress.com/bigcats/ 
 
 
 
its very well analysed and has led me to completely reverse my opinion. The tiger has it!

So, just imagine, a tiger and a lion met in a natural habitat, in an open grassland, no trees, just grass. Who would win the fight? This is a comment made by some one from another site: 
 
Persian Cat said: First of all, all the different colors on the tigers would make shadow effects and bumps more visible. The lion is one constant color. There is less contrast, but the lioness'es muscles are more visible than basically any cat on the planet. Just watch a video of a lioness moving and hunting and you'll know what I mean. As for male lions, they have a mane covering 1/2 the arm and most of the neck area.  
 
Now Jaw Force. I tell this to everybody. You don't need that much to kill. Lions can kill a well muscled cape buffalo with a muzzle clamp and throat bite. That takes a lot of force. Two, the tiger does not have a wider skull. That is just an illusion due to the fact that tigers have ruffs and lionesses(since they don't have manes) don't. However if you look at both animals from the side you will notice that the lion has the shorter muzzle. Tigers tend to have more hooked canines. This means that there is a higher chance of them falling off. This would also means tigers can't put too much force on them.  
 
Now for the fighting, my favorite part. Lions do very often fight on both legs at the same time. The speed has nothing to do with how muscled the animal is. You see the tiger uses a close jabbing method while the lion uses the wide clubber. Let me explain, if you clap close to your face as fast as possible, and if you bring your arms as wide as possible and try to bring as much frce as possible, which is faster? The one that is closer because it covers less distance. Same applies to lions and tigers.  
 
For fighting experience, I think it is pretty obvious that a lion fights more. There are plenty of males trying to take over the pride. Also, why do you think the females are so small? Because the males starve them. They fight all the females and bully themselves a meal. They fight a lot, trust me. Now why would a lion fight more? Because it can. Simple. He has backup and doesnt need to do the hunting if injured in a fight. A tiger on the other hand, is solitary, and he can't mooch off a pride. He has to fend for himself, which is really hard to do after being injured, so he may die of starvation. I don't know if you see those Korean everland videos or any video of lions fighting, but it is so clear that a lion is the excellent dodger. Just take your time to watch that. A lion dodges the attacks like a boxer, and plans his next move. This is illustrated in the Gir Forest where the lion kept on dodging the tigers attack and finally created a burst in the end, breaking the tiger's spine. Take a good look at the tiger and lion when they are fighting, the tiger when fighting looks stressed, nervous,confused, and as if it would be anywhere else. The lion is calm and composed, and has focus unlike the tiger.  
 
The mane protects the neck as well, not just the throat. Either way, a tiger would bite without results. As for brown bears, well, the only time tigers prey on brown bears is during or straight after hibernation. They ambush and kill brown bears for food, that isn't really a fight. 
 
Social animals tend to be generally smarter than solitary animals. We are social animals, so are dolphins, apes, monkeys, whales, etc. The grassland is a VERY complex habitat. Not just the jungle. Okay, how can a lion hide it's young from buffaloes and hyenas in the open? Not to mention lions have also been known to survive in dense jungles, like the congo in Africa and they were also once common throughout much of India just like the tiger. As for prey, bull gaurs are generally immune to tiger attacks just so you know. The babies are the ones at risk. A tiger killing a Gaur is known as a FREAK event, meaning it is too rare to be considered greatly, an anamoli as you'd call it. Same goes for baby asian elephants. Also, an African Elephant is twice the size of its asian relative, and has longer and sharper tusks as well. 
 
 
And some of the other things he didn't make clear: 
 
- African Elephants are not only twice as big but they both male and female have tusks, not just males (like the Asian Elephant). 
 
- Lions are born to fight, from a young age (as soon as they live their pride) they have to live solitarily and fight for survival and gain over territories, males rarely keep one pride for more than 2 years. And not every male has his own pride. Most males live solitarily and hunt, making the fact that males hunt a lie. Tigers fight only a few times in their whole life, the smallest scratch can cause a deadly infection in rainforest unlike open Savannah's and deeper wounds would starve them as they are unable to hunt. Unlike lions whom have pride mates that will feed them until they are well. 
 
- Either the Lion or the Tiger weighs 100 pounds more than the other. The people of the internet have yet to find out as no one has ever posted accurate weights and every one makes a different claim. I just want to say, don't judge which one is the better fighter by how fat it is. 
 
- Siberian Tigers are about the same size as Bengal Tigers, the only reason they weigh more is because of the thick layer of fat that covers them for protection against the harsh Russian winter. 
 
- A lions bravery is actually true. They are so brave because of testosterone build up in their body, which means they go crazy when angered and wont stop trying to kill you until they are dead. This gives a huge fighting advantage. 
 
- Both Lion and Tiger are actually about the same size, tigers are the larger cat (by mass) because they have the slightly longer body which brings no advantage. 
 
- Both Lion and Tiger fight on 2 legs, people claim that Lions can't stand on 2 legs and use both hands but thats not true. Tigers generally prefer to do lots of quick jabs while Lions do less punching but the ones that they do throw are more powerful and more effective which some what balances things out, but I still believe (according to this fact) lions have slight advantage (this is just my opinion). 
 
- Siberian Tigers and Bengal Tigers are both equal at fighting so the different breed wont make a difference. While Barbary Lions (thought to be extinct but now recovering in the wild) weigh almost 100 kilograms (more than pounds) more than a Siberian Tiger, these are the Lions that have main hair going all the way to their dick and their manes are much darker and almost black, I am pretty sure you have seen them. They are much larger than Africans. 
 
- Lions also climb trees, if you haven't seen the videos. They climb a vertical tree with no branches. Though they are generally not as fast as tigers, but that is because there are few trees in the Savannah and they don't need to climb, while tigers get training from a young age. 
 
- Tigers are some what more athletic but that doesn't bring much of an advantage. 
 
- But going according to African L. VS Siberian T., I would say (according to the facts) that lions would win 85% of all fights.

@Rubadubadoobag 
 
The post you linked is biased, the guy in that post said, the fact that lions fight almost their whole life while tigers fight only a few times maximum is no real advantage. Its like saying that a Shaolin Monk with 20 year experience behind him and training from the age of 8 can not beat a weight lifter because all that experience brings no real advantage. The guy seemed to know something but as soon as he said that. I stopped reading right there.

BTW those pictures form Nat Geo are completely idiotic, they were laughed at for months just for making those drawings.

DID'NT KNOW THAT LIONS CAN CLIMB TREES BUT NOW I KNOW THAT

DOES THE LION DIE AFTER HOW MANY YEARS,IN OTHER WORDS I MEAN WHICH LION IS THE OLDERST OF THEM ALL

Yes, in Roman times, the tigers won most of the time. In fact, they preferred to use tigresses to fight male lions, instead of using male tigers. This was to keep the battles more even and able to go either way.  
 
Don't believe me? Well, there are these little animal models that they sell at stores, In the "Ancient Rome" section, they have a lion and a tiger, and the lion is called, "Roman Battle Lion", and the tiger is called, "Roman Battle Tigress." 
 
If you have been there before and seen this then you can talk to me if not then whatever. 
But anyway I believe its 6/10 for the smaller tigers and 9/10 for the Siberian and Bengal against African and a more even fight would be Barbary vs Bengal which I put 6/10 for Bengal or Siberian

A single mother tigress was known to kill an adult Indian rhino who was protecting her calf, the calf is now at the WWF, I've never seen a lioness or even a lion or pride of lion go after a white mother rhino, hell not even a black rhino which are smaller. And a lone tigress killing a guar is not all that rear its just not recorded as much just like how lionesses protect their cubs form the knew males who take over the pride.

i think that you sound like a fucking idiot in your conclusion that the tiger would win im not saying that because i disagree its just the way you said it also i know the lion is more likely to win because when a tiger fights they box meaning they will hit a lion but not with full force and they way a lion fights is to knock thier apponent down so when they hit they move a little slower but they use full forece to knock them down and then they go for the kill

I think that you should have people vote for a Komodo dragon or a Monitor lizard and a Lynx vs Bobcat

copy and paste that and for those of you who say not to judge by size i have news for you unfortanatly in the animal kingdom size does matter

Well Zak have you been to Rome... and I can see you are not very intelligent since you resort to name calling but you only call people what you know you are, ancient Rome says that tigers were more victorious than lions in one and one fight. 
And there is a video of a lioness vs tigress were a single blow form the tigress broke the lioness jaw, so much for not full force...or unless you are saying that a lions jaw is easily broken because from what I know it takes a lot of force, so your conclusion is rather stupid and those tigers were oblivious not serious when they were fighting it was just a way to drive the lion off. 
The tiger would be the usual victor and the Romans proved it already.

http://www.tigersofindia.com/hunting-methods-of-tigers.php 
And tigers do use force as well 
here educate yourself.

actually there is no in most cases lions do win and you are both right in some cases tigers do use full force but they usually box and lions do usually hit with full force if you watched more videos i think you will see what i am talking about and to be honest i do think that the person who wrote the original article does sound a little ignorant

i dnt care wat u say i think it depends on the type of lion or tiger whether its male or famale its all about the size in the real world of animals and jim wat the fuck duz rome have to do with anything i live in fucking rome and i dnt no wat the fuck yall mean by boxing nd shit but i think the bigger animal will win no matter what

its me agian and i didnt mean ignorant i meant opionionated normally when you post something like this you dont put your opinion you put FACTS so people can decide for themselves and honestly i dont know why i even came back to this site considering it doesnt really solve anything i also think that its for people who have no life and waste thier time on the internet all day

I still think tigers are tougher than lions because 8 hunting dogs have been reported to kill a male lion in the Kruger nation park while it took 12 dhole dogs to kill a tiger, while the status of the conditions of the lion and tiger that were killed was not revealed the tiger still took on more animals than the lion.  
 
 
my bet tiger kills lion 8/10  
times

The old Romans used to arrange pit-fights between lions and tigers, the tiger killed the lion in 90% of the fights. In equal size the fight could go both ways, but the siberian tiger is not equal sized with a lion, the siberian tiger is nearly twice as big. A fullgrown male siberian tiger could easily become 300 kilograms while a fullgrown male african lion would be about 170 kilograms perhaps a bit more sometimes. Siberian tigers are known to hunt and kill adult brown bears in solitude while lions are almost incapable of killing even a buffalo without it`s pride.

Actually it was the Persian(even though Persian tigers are Siberian tigers but smaller on average) and the Bengal tigers than the Romans used the most and those tigers still came out on top, size don't mean a thing in this fight even though the tiger would win most of the time if a smaller and more aggressive lion was fighting a tiger only like 20Kg larger then the lion might put up a good fight or even come out on top. 
But the tiger would be victorious most of then time .

Sure,its the Tiger.Bigger,stronger and faster. Female lions only hunt and in packs.Male lions are lazy.Like many people said,the Tiger brings down large animals..that's right.Lion don't deserve to be the king of jungle.The Tiger should be the King of Jungle or the Elephant coz its Big.

The Siberian tiger is the biggest cat with the Bengal tiger as runner up. The lion comes in at third place for size. I recently watched a documentary about the Asian lion. These lions are now prospering. More now than in the past 30 years. There range is now going into Bengal tiger country. It has been witnessed, more than once, a single tiger can drive off a whole pride of lions.  
 
The male tiger is bigger and stronger. His harem of females will not interfere with a cat vs cat fight. Tiger wins.

The program I watched stated that the tiger is at least 100 pounds heavier than the lion. There are now some reports that the Bengal tiger is even bigger than the Siberian. On this matter, I am uncertain. Also I question, is the Asian lion as big as an African lion?

Damon, the tiger does have the genetic to be larger than a lion. Before tigers were hunt to the limit, the siberian tigers could have reached up to 850 lb on maximum, a lion is 620 lb in the wild, but VERY rarely. Even in captive, the largest lion was 826 lb while the largest tiger was 1025. 200 lb heavier than the lion!  
 
 
 
And pound for pound, the tiger is also stronger than a lion. According to my research about cats.  
 
 
 
Tigers in general are more muscular and robustly built, particularly around the shoulder and forelimb area than lions. The new factor you have introduced (equal weight) does change things somewhat... The differences would still be noticeable and noteworthy in specimens of the same size and weight. Generally speaking, for the two immature specimens to have equal weight, the lion must be older than the tiger. Why ? Because tigers are generally larger than lions, so this shortfall must be made up by a little more Development time - hence the older lion specimen. An analogy would be comparing a 6ft tall 17 year old male human (the tiger) with a 22 year old 5 ft 9 in human (the lion). The two (in this analogy) have equal weight because the older man has a more developed musculature that makes up for the shortfall in height to give equal weight. Still following this analogy, it is unclear which would be stronger - the physically larger but less developed man (17 year old) may or may not be as strong as the physically smaller, but more developed 22 year old. The same applies to an immature lion and tiger of equal weight.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Now, when they are both older and more developed, the tiger WILL be stronger at equal body weight due simply to its greater musculature and more robust build. The overall conclusion must still be that a tiger is stronger than a lion at equal weight.

i think tiger will win..as i hve seen a video in which a tiger attacks a fully developed adult elephant.by this u can imagine the aggressiveness of a tiger and als0 tigers are more muscluar thans lions

i think the tiger wins the battle 
 
and the bengal tiger known for its ferociousness 
 
even scientist xclaim that they hven't seen such anxiety in any animal

And of course you are the expert, aren't you? ;) You give wrong information, no one will believe you. Every one can see that you're not able thinking logic. "Do not reply"...afraid of being convinced? Can't understand how any one can disagree with the facts given by Damon, he always backs up his data, in nearly every post...do you? No. Tigerfans always doubt whether the given data is true and say 'Tiger is da King' without backing up their 'facts'. Cause of this no one believes you. Lions are the bettet fighters and will win most fights, if it's a fight for life he'll win nearly every fight. Facts for that are given before. Try to understand.

Hey there people, 
we can debate all day long, but the truth hurts.. for lion fans. 
I have emailed various experts, wildlife research institues, zoos, reserve managers etc. 
 
And their reply are consistent, almost 80 - 85% favors the tiger. With the others mostly saying anyone could win, a handful favors the lion. Please take note, i have over 200 replies. 
 
Bronx Zoo, Miami Metro Zoo, Valmik Thapar, John Varty, Randy Miller, Predators in Action, Srirachi Zoo, San Diego Zoo, San francisco zoo, Singapore Zoo, Central Park Zoo, Tiger Creek sanctuary, Break creek Foundation, Save China's Tigers, Lionresearch.org, Craig Packer, Big Cat Rescue, turpentile wildlife creek etc etc... much more, feel free to google these names, and find their email address and email them. Seriously they all favor the tiger. 
 
Let's have some quotes shall we? 
"“People always ask me which one is bigger? If a tiger and a lion had a fight, which one would win? Well, I’ve seen tigers crunch up a full-grown leopard tortoise like it was nothing. And lions try, but they just don’t get it right. If there’s a fight, the tiger will win, every time.” 
- John Varty, filmmaker 
Source: http://www.countrylife.co.za/index.php?p[IGcms_nodes][IGcms_nodesUID]=824ae7e6dd94d4bc4e3b3c83f0d74947 
 
"While we would much prefer that people focus their thoughts on saving these magnificent animals than on who would win if a lion and tiger fight, the power of these two largest cats seems to raise this question in people's minds. While it would depend on the size, age and aggressiveness of the specific animals involved, generally tigers have a significant advantage" 
- Big Cat Rescue 
http://www.bigcatrescue.org/faq 
 
# Are tigers stronger than lions? And if they fight, who will win? 
 
Recent research indicates that the tiger is indeed stronger than the lion in terms of physical strength. Lions hunts in prides, so it would be in a group and the tigers as a solitary creature so it would be on its own. A Tiger is generally physically larger than a Lion. Most Experts would favour a Siberian and Bengal Tiger over an African Lion. 
- Save China's Tigers 
http://english.savechinastigers.org/node/410 
 
Nat Geo also favors the tiger 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvcE_5uNShM 
 
Bite force charts, stamina charts, strength, hrr chart...from various institues all favor tiger as the stronger and more athletical feline. 
 
You are pitting a larger, stronger, faster, feline with longer canines(along with higher biteforce) and larger paws and claws against a smaller, weaker cat. 
This is not even debate.  
I have so much more sources that it is not even funny, i would love to give more evidence if asked to. =)

So, Tigerboy, than let's ask Dave Salmoni, Clyde Beatty and other ones who really say them FIGHTING! The only reknowned scientist you mentioned there is Craig Packer - and he said one time that the tige's gonna win, another time the lion's gonna win, another time that he doesn't know. He even admitted sometimes that he doesn#t know much more about tigers than that they're big cats. They other ones didn't ever see them fighting or are just biased. If you want i can send you much more experts opinions that favor the lion. There are reasons why Clyde Beatty and Dave Salmoni changed their mind from favoring the tiger to favoring the lion after seing them fighting! And if you want the theory: Lions hold the record of muscle mass with around 60%, much more than a tiger with 27-50% fat. They're much more experienced in fighting than tigers, cause they have to defend their pride against other lions/have to take over other prides. Tigers avoid fighting each other cause if they get injured that weakens their hunting ability what means starvation. Lions don't care about injures, they have a pride, if they can't hunt for a while, even so they get prey. So they fight much more ferocious. They have stronger limbs and equal biteforce, more testosterone and a WAY better protection: The mane. If any one sais the mane offers no protection against tigers, he didn't see them fighting: Every single paw swipe, every single bite the tiger lands disappears in the lions mane, they just can't injure him bad enough to win the fight. A tiger has no real protection against a lions bite or paw swipe. The lions paw swipes are a bit slower than the tigers but much heavier and critical strike the enemy with nearly every paw swipe. Lions bones are more dense than the ones of a tiger so his swipes are much stronger, combined with his VERY strong limbs. And that lions are LAZY or that they're weaker cause they hunt in prides is a mistake that very many people believe in. Lions also have to hunt alone in their lives, around 25% a male lion eats when he has a pride is hunted by himself. He also has to live around 2-5 years alone in search for a new pride in which he fights very often against other lions and has to hunt for his own. The prey in africa is much larger than the prey in Asia. OK, the Gaur is a bit bigger then the Cape buffalo but cape buffalos are much more aggressive so lions really have to fight. Tigers are solitary hunters but they don't have to be really strong because they're ambush hunters. They don't fight with their prey, the kill it within seconds cause he surprises it and kills it with a neck/throat bite...which is senseless when fighting a lion. Tigers are more agile as i have to admit but lions have much more stamina. A tiger needs no stamina being an ambush hunter. A lions needs strong jaws, much stamina and strong limbs cause his fights against bigger prey like giraffes, elephants, hippos and buffalos sometimes last about twenty minutes - in which he hangs on his prey! with his teeth or his limbs. Also lions have a much bigger heart, bigger lungs and more red blood cells what indicates a better stamina. If the tiger doesn't beat the lion within 10-20 seconds, what won't happen in 90% of the fights cause the only effective attacks of the tiger doesn't break through the lion's mane. Just to destroy another Myth: Tigers are NEITHER bigger NOR really heavier than lions. Lions are up to 35 cm taller but in most cases a bit shorter in length. Their weight is about the same, tigers weigh in average 5-20kg more than lions...no diciding difference. And Tigerboy: You ESTIMATED 80-85% of your replies say the tiger would win. You're biased in favor for the tiger so it's around 50-60%. That you have over 200 replies sais nothing. You can ask some expert and than just thank him again and again, discuss about other debates ect. The experts you asked include two times the word "tiger". That means the love tigers, what doesn't mean they hate lions but favor the tiger and want them to win. To mention the older film of national geographic which sais the tiger has more biteforce is no well strategy. They made many new films in which they said they've the same biteforce, some of them even say the lion has the stronger bite, even if they don't compare lion and tiger. So stop spreading old and antiquated information here. The tiger's Canines differ from 5-7,5 cm (2,5-3 inches) what means IF they are longer the difference is very slight. The Lions canines are thicker what means they don't break as fast as the thin, bent canines of a tiger which means they have no fear to land a vicious bite. Sorry, but your comment is only biased and brings some wrong information so it's useless and invalidatet. I could send you proof for nearly every advantage i mentioned, some are just logic facts and common sense. The lion is the usual winner, accept it. Watch videos on youtube. Not the edited videos just the full fights, in most cases the lion wins. Just eye evidence you cant contradict.

jackjacksonj.webs.com/tigervslionaccounts.htm

@Toby: Nothing compared to what Damon gave in the other discussion. Just look there and at wildanimalelite.yuku.com, you'll see the tiger in no way is stronger. Except in agility but this doesn't matter in a fight.

Are you kidding? They lion is a little kitty-cat next to a fullgrown siberian tiger... The lion would be torn apart within the first minute of the "fight", or slaughter as I`ve come to think of it. The siberian tiger easly become over 300 kg while an african lion are about 170-180 kg.. You see, by this the siberian tiger is nearly twice as big. The siberian tiger hunts in solitude big, fast and dangerous animals such as elks, deers, water buffalos and even adult brown bears. Now, is the lion capable of taking down any of this animals by them self or what? If no, why not? Isn`t this because they are not agile, cunning, fast, heavly equipped or strong enough to do this? I think so yes. So how the hell would such an animal be capable of killing an animal that hunts and kill all of this creatures, in sulitude, all the time? Explain that to me please.

It'll be a pleasure for me. A lion IS able to take down a giraffe or a buffalo alone. He doesn't have to hide like tigers, in the savanna there#s no real place to hide. So they attack and fight head on, not like a tiger just ambushing his prey. A tiger doesn't have to fight, he kills with a quick, unexpected neckbite. So you'e one of these tigerfans that believe a tiger get's in average about 300kg, has 5 inch canines and a biteforce of about 1200 pounds, aren't you? Sorry that i have to disappoint you, but...no study, not a single one shows this! Some films say tigers have a biteforce of 1200 pounds ok, but in this case i could mention the study in which is said the lion has 1764 Newton biteforce, a Tiger 1500 newton, which could be compared with 1200 pounds at the lion. This study is scientific well renown, just look it up, you'll find it very often. It has to do with the kind of fighting/hunting which animals could kill other kinds of animals. A lion fights a tiger ambushes, this is HUNTING! In a fight between them hunting strategies don't matter. Nearly every advantage in comparison goes to the lion, except agility, but this also doesn't really matter in a fight. Inform better before writing some text about an animal you favor. If you want i could show you many prooves for what i mentioned. Question answered?

Why is it that it only takes one Bengal tiger to drive away a whole pride of Gir lions?

Cause there are no tigers near Gir Forest.

Do your research Leo. Recently, it's been on the news and on a tv documentary. Gir lions have been introduced into other locations because of the recent success of the growing Gir lion population.  
 
On the documaentary, the park rangers said that the lion is no match for the Bengal tigers.

Show this documentation please? or where did you see it? And i researched, all i found out was that the tiger doesn't live near gir forest. If they were so much stronger, one killing a whole pride, why does the population of lions grow thee, hm? Show me some proof (no edited tigerfan film/fansite, a scientific film of nat geo of discovery or a scientific well renown study or something like this. Than i'll show you data that proofs you wrong.

LOL @ Leo! 
DAVE SALMONI? OMG! Do you know who you are talking about? DAVE SALMONI? LOL LOL LOL! I am laughing so hard now! 
 
Let's talk about the Dave Salmoni interview first? Shall we? I was the first person who found it, and yet i send the whole 17minutes interview to Royal_Leo(a lionfan) and then he send to lionownstiger(brittany) who uploaded it. Why did i send it to him in the first place? Because there was no threat involve as Dave Salmoni isn't an expert. Here are my elaborations, 
 
He is a zookeeper, a big cat trainer, not an expert. He works at Bowmanville zoo in Canada, just in case you don't know. Bowmanville zoo is reknown for its trained animals, it is known as a "circus zoo" which has provived many animals for hollywood, including Bongo the lion featuring in George of the Jungle, it is like a circus. 
 
Dave Salmoni is not an expert, he has never worked hands on with a wild feline and participate in any conservation projects. Have you seen his documentary, "Living with tigers" which have been proven to be a Fraud, the tigers can't hunt, the tigers are not released, the tigers are not purebred. John Varty admitted it was for good tv, money and to promote Dave Salmoni's fame. I have enough sources to back that up. I repeat - The Tigers are not released, and will never be, the IUCN doesn't allow unpure animals to be released, and JV have never intended to release the tigers anyway, they are there for a filming permit, lmao! 
 
Next, "Into the Lion's Den", i have the DVD. Watch the scene where the Jaguar nearly bit Dave Salmoni, and how Dave Salmoni pushed the Jaguar's head away and wanted to punch it, his trainer Michael(if i remember correct) stopped him and thought him to calm down and says "I know you feel like killing it". If he was an expert, a good "conservationist", how would he want to punch a jaguar just because it nearly bit him? "Into the lion's den" is a stupid show which makes him famous, it isn't about conservation, the lions are not the main characters, he is. It is his Story, not the lions' story, it is about him not conservation. 
 
In his 17minutes interview, there are alot of flaws, including him mentioning that Sharks are Top ocean predators(not orcas, the reason is he only worked with Sharks, lmao!). And he mentioned that Tigers are top land predators, do lionfans agree with that? 
 
He mentioned a siberian tiger could be 100 - 150lbs heavier than a BIG male lion, do you lionfans agree with that? He mentions that when a tiger wants to kill you, there is nothing we can do, but when a lion wants to kill you, you can stop him easily(with little accord). 
 
^How does all of that sound? If you take his words seriously, then i seriously don't mind since he mentioned much more tigers that favors the Tiger as a much better hunter, killer and athlete compared to a male lion. 
 
And also, if you wishe to trust this zookeeper/big cat trainer, why don't you guys trust Randy Miller instead, who has 25years of experience training lions and tigers, and favors the tiger in a fight. Dave Salmoni has only 5 years of experience, compare and contrast =). 
 
Also i would like to mention that, Dave Salmoni has never ever seen a lion vs tiger fight, he admitted that on a television show and say that it is his opinion that lions should win, but one could argue, there is no "consistent winner". 
Anyway when i send it to Royal_leo, i said he could upload it, but make sure he expose all the myths regarding Dave Salmoni first, Dave is a liar who lied about conservation on the show "living with tigers", he isn't credible. I don't respect him, nopt because he favors the lion but because of what he has done to promote his own fame at any cost. 
 
I have sources for all that i've say, you can ask me for them. 
 
I like Dave Salmoni, he is a great guy, but his antics to gain fame, popularity and money makes him utterly unreliable as a source. Dave Salmoni is synonymous with a word "Fraud". Google " Dave Salmoni Fraud" 
Research about Dave Salmoni, lol. Leo, please, grow up. You don't need people to spoonfeed you. When i enter this debate, you are still in your diapers. 
I found the dave salmoni interview, not you. I gave it to reputable lionfans, people like you misuse it. 
 
Next Craig Packer, great guy, seen lots of fights, I truely respect him and his opinions. But let's look closer shall we? 
 
Craig packer has seen dozens of Fights between lions and tigers, and has given Tigers a fair amount of respect in terms of fight ability. He has stated that some of his tigers are unmatched by lions, eg: Rajah. 
Here are some quotes from his last book(before he died) where he mentions about Lion vs Tiger. 
 
""Rogue, a big tiger, had taken his accustomed perch on the highest pedestal in the arena, eleven feet above the floor-level. Prince, one of the heftiest lions in the show and a bad actor, suddenly took it into his head to cause trouble. Without warning he made a tremendous leap and, just managing to sink in his claws, dragged the tiger down from his roost. Had the striped cat expected the attack he could have braced himself and stayed put; but the suddenness of the assault was too much for him and he lost his balance. The two animals had hardly struck the floor when caeser ran over to join the scrap and help his brother Prince win a lion victory. Rogue fought himself clear of his two assailants and backed up against the iron bars of the big cage. It was a clever move, for it meant that he would not have to worry about an attack from behind. At least his back was protected and that was something. Then followed a sort of animal boxing-match. Roaring their murderous intent, the lions closed in on the tiger, but they were temporarily frustrated in their efforts to inflict real damage. Rogue gave them a boxing lesson, slashing away so effectively with his paws that it was impossible for either Prince or caeser to get set for one of those deadly bites at the throat that are always the main objective in such a tussle. No more than a few seconds elasped before Brutus, another lion, joined in the scrap. And now the struggle was more one-sided than ever. Three lions against one tiger! Having lost many tigers through the ganging up of lions, i knew i was up against something pretty serious. But there is nothing that can be done in the early moments of such a battle. The combatants lose their heads and go temporarily mad. So i waited, watching not only the fighters but also the other animals, all of them nervously alert, with a realization of what was going on but unable to decide whether to take part in the scrimmage. Meanwhile the vast audience was getting a thrill, but most people naturally thought it was all part of the regular act. Rogue seemed undaunted by the arrival of his third adversary. He was lashing out in all directions so fast that it was difficult for the eye to follow the lightening-like movements of his paws. And thus he managed to keep his attackers away until i succeeded in getting the lions to fight me instead of him. This i did by poking them with a heavy stick, repeating my pokes in rapidfire fashion until they could no longer ignore me. Then, when they came at me, i blanked them with my gun. The idea of the blank cartridge, of course, is to startle the beasts and get their minds on something else. Only in rare caes, where the situation is desperate, is it necessary to blank an animal smack in the face. Almost always, as i have made clear, i level the gun so that the fire goes over the animal`s head or to one side. On this particular occasion, the three lions were perfectly willing to call it a day. Their fight with Rogue had not been very satisfactory." 
 
"my sumatra tiger Chester once fought off seven lions before a crowd at collinsville, pennsylvania, and emerged from the scrap little the worst for wear…..i`ll have to admit that it is seldom a tiger can hold his own very long in a struggle with several lions that have ganged up, but i`ve seen it happen often enough, in the years i`ve been mixing the two species of cats in the ring, to feel that i can fairly cite these cases in proof of the prowess of the tiger as a fighter." page, 258 
 
"Sulton was in a scrappy mood-perhaps disliking the role of movie actor-and one by one took on and whipped every tiger in my act. It was an amazing performance, but, i admit, not a typical one. Although i have given my opinion, the question of lion-tiger superiority is pretty much of a toss-up." page 258-259 
 
"In a fight between a full-grown lion and a full-grown tiger, i`d be inclined to bet on the lion, largely because he has certain phsical advantages. His mane, for instance, protects his throat; the tiger has no such protection. My average lion, also, is a little bigger and heavier than my average tiger. My statement might suggest that i am depreciating the striped cat`s speed and terrific ferocity, but it is by no means my intention to do so. I wouldn`t do much frenzied betting on a fight between a lion and tiger of the same age and weight : that would be foolish." page 255 
 
"as snip was about to past under the pedestal occupied by a strappy lioness, the latter jumped down on top of her. then, almost instantly, duke, the big lion that had started the fight with rosie a few minutes earlier, jumped down off his pedestal and grabbed a tiger. all other tigers except three jumped to the floor of the arena-not so much to join the fight as to be in readiness to leave the arena. their are no greater scrappers than tigers, but they avoid fights, whereas the lion intinctively starts a fight or joins the nearest one. the tigers had hardly touched the floor of the arena when the lions, every single one in the act, were after them. each lion was making a lunge for the nearest tiger. the arena was now in an uproar. it fairly trembled with the struggles of the combatants. all of my animals except three tigers-rajah, empress, and rosie- joined the awful free-for-all. this meant that twenty lions were fighting nine tigers; and unless i could quell the riot that in its opening momments breathed more hate and murderous intent than any animal fight i had ever seen, it was a reasonable certainty that some of my tigers would be wiped out. the tiger is one of the deadliest of four-legged fighters, but he is not a super creature, and when surrounded and badly outnumbered, he finds it difficult to fight in his most effective manner. a tiger is normally at his best when fighting one other animal; and usually that one other animal is doomed. the striped cat is not a group fighter. as i have pointed out before, lions are the gangsters, tigers fight alone. at one time it looked as if ten lions were battling chester-a good sized animal for a sumatra tiger-at one and the same time. one had him by the hind quarters, another slashed at his right shoulder, still another dug murderous teeth into his left leg. and all around him were lions ready to bite and claw him. swarming about him, they had singled him out as their special victim. i wanted to go to chester`s rescue, but it would have been a suicidal thing to do. the lions would have turned from him and made for me. they were now definitely past the controllable stage. cues would mean nothing. the trainer who tried to break up a fight of this kind while it was at its height, instead of waiting for it to subside, would definitely establish himself as too ignorant to be permitted to enter an arena again. there was only one thing for me to do and that was to get out of the arena if possible and from the outside try to drive some of the combatants through the tunnel and back into their cages. the tunnel door was wide open. so great was the din of battle that the boy at the door was unable to hear my cry: "let`em out! let`em out!" but my frantic gestures had made clear my meaning. nothing, however, was accomplished. the tigers would have been glad to leave the arena, but there were too many lions on top of them. rosie, empress, and rajah sat calmly on their pedestals, watching the terrific struggle on the floor below them. rajah, one of the greatest fighters the arena has ever known, dozed off occasionally during the battle. yet, in an animal-against-animal fight with any lion or tiger in the ring (all other beasts excluded and the scrap confined to two combatants) i`d have backed rajah to get no worse than a draw. he was diabolical in combat-one of the fastest, bravest, and most powerful tigers i`ve ever handled-but gang fights bored him; and now he sat and yawned his lack of interest in the epic struggle taking place a few yards away from where he languidly sat. chester`s plight seemed of no interest at all to rajah. chester had gotten himself into a fix and he would have to get out of it himself. no sense fighting lions when they outnumber you. fight`em when you have an even chance… i had to get out of the big cage somehow, and perhaps from the outside contrive to stampede the animals toward the tunnel door. besides, i was too fond of life to risk being torn by this group of killers; for now that my animals had all lost their heads, i was inside a barred jungle-a far more dangerous place than any real jungle. at any moment the struggling pack might lose interest in the fight and turn on me. only their absorption in the grim business of annihilation one another was what had saved me so far. with my back to the bars, to prevent an attack from behind, i slowly worked my way toward the safety-cage. it would have been foolhardy to run; that would have attracted too much attention. but chester had caught sight of me and, deciding that i was responsible for all his troubles, he tried to reach me. shaking himself loose by a tremendous effort, he started toward me with hate in his eyes. he was stopped by the lion gang after he had traveled about two yards. they were all on top of him again. that brought me closer to the bloodthirsty pack and it was more important than ever that i reach the safety-cage. once more chester, eying me venomously, started for me, but his assailants had him down again before he had advanced more than a foot. if i could only reach that safety-cage i should be able to do something for him before his enemies destroyed him. he was holding his own and though he was bleeding in two or three places, there was no indication that he had been serioulsy injured. and all the while three tigers on the high seats continued to look down at the spectacle, plainly bored. rajah seemed drowsier than ever. the conduct of the crowd contrasted dramatically with the blase attitude of the striped non-combatants. all around me i could hear women screaming and men shouting. another step . . . and still another . . . and with each succeeding one a half-hour seemed to elapse. as i neared the safety-cage at this snail-like pace, theba, one of my biggest tigers, shook himself free of the milling pack and ran over and mounted his floor seat to the left of the safety-door. the lion he was battling did not pursue him, but turned against another tiger." "in his excitement theba did not notive that the tunnel door was open and that he could have escaped into the chute and gone to his cage. that is the only possible explaination of his +%!%+ conduct in climbing back to his seat. i stood rooted where i was, awaiting developments. about ten seconds later hilda, one of my better-behaved lionesses, decided to quit the fray. she also, too excited to realize the tunnel door was open, got back on a pedestal. instead of taking her own, she scrambled up on the floor seat to the right of the safety-cage! to reach the door now, i must pass between a lion and a tiger. i had no intention of attempting anything like that… what to do? i wasn`t panicky, but i was decidedly worried. and then chester made my decision for me. with almost unnatural strength he again tore himself loose from his attackers, and, teeth bared and face distorted with rage and hate, headed for me. i made a dash for it-straight between the two animals that flanked me, right and left! to this day, i don`t know how i ever made it… i don`t recall being attacked, but when i slammed the door of the safety-cage, i noticed that my shirt was torn and that my left arm was bleeding from a surface wound. theba had probably made a pass at ma as i dashed by. taken by surprise, he had not had a chance to launch a real attack; or perhaps he was content with a swipe at me. the lions were again on top of chester. they had evidently stopped his last dash before he had covered more than a yard. all around me i could hear the shrieks of horrified spectators. i was a bit dazed from shock, but my head cleared and i set to work doing what i could to break up the fight. assistants had been standing ready to pump ammonia into the arena, but they feared that in addition to affecting the animals the fumes might overcome me. i signaled them to let fly. at once several of the struggling beasts, coughing and choking, dashed for the tunnel door. only nine animals remained in the arena-seven lions and two tigers, one of the latter obviously dead. yet the lions continued to maul the lifeless body. i decided to go in and break up this remnant of the fray. one of the animals lunged for me as i neared the group, but i turned him with a blaze from my blank-cartridge gun. then, alternately using my chair, a pole, and my gun, i drove the last of the warriors from the arena-all except the two tigers. one was dead and the other, snip, was badly injured. she just managed to crawl to her cage. the best veterinary in the district was quickly summoned to supplement our own first-aid efforts, but it was too late. poor snip died three or four hours later. one of the most amazing things about this awful battle (the worst arena fight of my whole career) was the fact that chester, who had been surrounded by lions for almost the entire period of the tussle, emerged with no serious injuries. he was torn in three or four different places, but the wounds were all superfiical and in ten days he was as spry and chipper as ever." ".......in saying this i am trying to answer the question that has been asked me most frequently since i first embarked upon my career as a trainer of wild animals: "can a lion lick a tiger in a fight or vice versa?" i`m afraid that oft-repeated question, like a few others which circus fans put up to me, can never be completely and categorically answered. since lions and tigers come from different parts of the world, there is no chance of deciding it in the natural habitat of either beast. and the scraps that take place in captivity do not furnish an accurate gage. for they are usually characterized by circumstances that give one side or the other the advantage-this advantage generally being on the side of the lions, owing to their incurable tendency to gang up against any foe." although i`d be inclined to favor the lion in a finish fight, i could cite many instances of a single tiger fighting off a group of lions. in fact, my sumatra tiger chester once fought off seven lions before a crowd at collinsville, pennsylvania, and emerged from the scrap little the worst for wear. chester has been in my act for five years and is still going strong, veteran of many battles. i`ll have to admit that it is seldom a tiger can hold his own very long in a struggle with several lions that have ganged up, but i`ve seen it happen often enough, in the years i`ve been mixing the two species of cats in the ring, to feel that i can fairly cite these cases in proof of the prowess of the tiger as a fighter. on the other hand, i could bring up a certain amount of pretty convincing evidence on the lion`s side of the controversy. even while i am writting this, one of my favorite tigers, princess, is dying in consequence of a brief encounter with the maned enemy. and princess is only one of a half-dozen striped cats that i have lost in the same way since i started my present act. so there are two sides to the lion-tiger business about which the circus fans inqure so persistantly." 
 
"rex, a royal bengal tiger, was the most dependable cat i have ever trained. he went to greater lengths to avoid a fight than any other lion or tiger i have known. when the issue was forced upon him and there was no escape from a battle, he fought like a demon and usually won. his first move when another beast attacked hin was to jump to a high pedestal and remain perched there. three or four times lions ganged up on such occasions and dragged him down from his roost-and always lived to regret it. for rex was at his best when the odds were against him. of all the great cats i have handled for any length of time, rex is the only one i have never known to start a fight. but, like many another true lover of peace, when attacked he fough with an outraged fury that his assailants could not match. i once worked myself into a cold sweat keeping rex from killing theba-now the biggest tiger in my act. rex, in a playful mood, tried to play with theba, whose response was to lash out and start a fight. a terrific tussle followed. the animals were locked together, each determinedly trying to rip the other`s throat. only by dashing ammonia on them could i stop them. when i finally got them separated they were so exhausted they could hardly move. theba rolled over in a heap and was groggy for a full minute. rex moved around uncerainly and obviously too had had enough; but he had more resistance than his attacker."

Read my earlier post 
PS: Do not be like those lionfans which are disgusting and depend on tiger fans to provide every info. Find your own counterarguments to work on your arguments. 
 
The documentary Toby is refering to is called "Asia's last Lions" broadcasted on Animal planet and Nat Geo. 
Even without the documentary, minor research or small amount of emailing to top experts of Indian regarding the lion relocation project will tell you one thing: 
Their biggest fear for relocation is they are afraid Tigers will maul lions and kill them off in central india.

Woops, it is really late when i am typing my rebuttal, i didn't mean "craig Packer" i mean Clyde Beatty. 
 
Next Clyde Beatty, great guy, seen lots of fights, I truely respect him and his opinions. But let's look closer shall we?  
 
Clyde Beatty has seen dozens of Fights between lions and tigers, and has given Tigers a fair amount of respect in terms of fight ability. He has stated that some of his tigers are unmatched by lions, eg: Rajah.  
Here are some quotes from his last book(before he died) where he mentions about Lion vs Tiger.  
 
""Rogue, a big tiger, had taken his accustomed perch on the highest pedestal in the arena, eleven feet above the floor-level. Prince, one of the heftiest lions in the show and a bad actor, suddenly took it into his head to cause trouble. Without warning he made a tremendous leap and, just managing to sink in his claws, dragged the tiger down from his roost. Had the striped cat expected the attack he could have braced himself and stayed put; but the suddenness of the assault was too much for him and he lost his balance. The two animals had hardly struck the floor when caeser ran over to join the scrap and help his brother Prince win a lion victory. Rogue fought himself clear of his two assailants and backed up against the iron bars of the big cage. It was a clever move, for it meant that he would not have to worry about an attack from behind. At least his back was protected and that was something. Then followed a sort of animal boxing-match. Roaring their murderous intent, the lions closed in on the tiger, but they were temporarily frustrated in their efforts to inflict real damage. Rogue gave them a boxing lesson, slashing away so effectively with his paws that it was impossible for either Prince or caeser to get set for one of those deadly bites at the throat that are always the main objective in such a tussle. No more than a few seconds elasped before Brutus, another lion, joined in the scrap. And now the struggle was more one-sided than ever. Three lions against one tiger! Having lost many tigers through the ganging up of lions, i knew i was up against something pretty serious. But there is nothing that can be done in the early moments of such a battle. The combatants lose their heads and go temporarily mad. So i waited, watching not only the fighters but also the other animals, all of them nervously alert, with a realization of what was going on but unable to decide whether to take part in the scrimmage. Meanwhile the vast audience was getting a thrill, but most people naturally thought it was all part of the regular act. Rogue seemed undaunted by the arrival of his third adversary. He was lashing out in all directions so fast that it was difficult for the eye to follow the lightening-like movements of his paws. And thus he managed to keep his attackers away until i succeeded in getting the lions to fight me instead of him. This i did by poking them with a heavy stick, repeating my pokes in rapidfire fashion until they could no longer ignore me. Then, when they came at me, i blanked them with my gun. The idea of the blank cartridge, of course, is to startle the beasts and get their minds on something else. Only in rare caes, where the situation is desperate, is it necessary to blank an animal smack in the face. Almost always, as i have made clear, i level the gun so that the fire goes over the animal`s head or to one side. On this particular occasion, the three lions were perfectly willing to call it a day. Their fight with Rogue had not been very satisfactory."  
 
"my sumatra tiger Chester once fought off seven lions before a crowd at collinsville, pennsylvania, and emerged from the scrap little the worst for wear…..i`ll have to admit that it is seldom a tiger can hold his own very long in a struggle with several lions that have ganged up, but i`ve seen it happen often enough, in the years i`ve been mixing the two species of cats in the ring, to feel that i can fairly cite these cases in proof of the prowess of the tiger as a fighter." page, 258  
 
"Sulton was in a scrappy mood-perhaps disliking the role of movie actor-and one by one took on and whipped every tiger in my act. It was an amazing performance, but, i admit, not a typical one. Although i have given my opinion, the question of lion-tiger superiority is pretty much of a toss-up." page 258-259  
 
"In a fight between a full-grown lion and a full-grown tiger, i`d be inclined to bet on the lion, largely because he has certain phsical advantages. His mane, for instance, protects his throat; the tiger has no such protection. My average lion, also, is a little bigger and heavier than my average tiger. My statement might suggest that i am depreciating the striped cat`s speed and terrific ferocity, but it is by no means my intention to do so. I wouldn`t do much frenzied betting on a fight between a lion and tiger of the same age and weight : that would be foolish." page 255  
 
"as snip was about to past under the pedestal occupied by a strappy lioness, the latter jumped down on top of her. then, almost instantly, duke, the big lion that had started the fight with rosie a few minutes earlier, jumped down off his pedestal and grabbed a tiger. all other tigers except three jumped to the floor of the arena-not so much to join the fight as to be in readiness to leave the arena. their are no greater scrappers than tigers, but they avoid fights, whereas the lion intinctively starts a fight or joins the nearest one. the tigers had hardly touched the floor of the arena when the lions, every single one in the act, were after them. each lion was making a lunge for the nearest tiger. the arena was now in an uproar. it fairly trembled with the struggles of the combatants. all of my animals except three tigers-rajah, empress, and rosie- joined the awful free-for-all. this meant that twenty lions were fighting nine tigers; and unless i could quell the riot that in its opening momments breathed more hate and murderous intent than any animal fight i had ever seen, it was a reasonable certainty that some of my tigers would be wiped out. the tiger is one of the deadliest of four-legged fighters, but he is not a super creature, and when surrounded and badly outnumbered, he finds it difficult to fight in his most effective manner. a tiger is normally at his best when fighting one other animal; and usually that one other animal is doomed. the striped cat is not a group fighter. as i have pointed out before, lions are the gangsters, tigers fight alone. at one time it looked as if ten lions were battling chester-a good sized animal for a sumatra tiger-at one and the same time. one had him by the hind quarters, another slashed at his right shoulder, still another dug murderous teeth into his left leg. and all around him were lions ready to bite and claw him. swarming about him, they had singled him out as their special victim. i wanted to go to chester`s rescue, but it would have been a suicidal thing to do. the lions would have turned from him and made for me. they were now definitely past the controllable stage. cues would mean nothing. the trainer who tried to break up a fight of this kind while it was at its height, instead of waiting for it to subside, would definitely establish himself as too ignorant to be permitted to enter an arena again. there was only one thing for me to do and that was to get out of the arena if possible and from the outside try to drive some of the combatants through the tunnel and back into their cages. the tunnel door was wide open. so great was the din of battle that the boy at the door was unable to hear my cry: "let`em out! let`em out!" but my frantic gestures had made clear my meaning. nothing, however, was accomplished. the tigers would have been glad to leave the arena, but there were too many lions on top of them. rosie, empress, and rajah sat calmly on their pedestals, watching the terrific struggle on the floor below them. rajah, one of the greatest fighters the arena has ever known, dozed off occasionally during the battle. yet, in an animal-against-animal fight with any lion or tiger in the ring (all other beasts excluded and the scrap confined to two combatants) i`d have backed rajah to get no worse than a draw. he was diabolical in combat-one of the fastest, bravest, and most powerful tigers i`ve ever handled-but gang fights bored him; and now he sat and yawned his lack of interest in the epic struggle taking place a few yards away from where he languidly sat. chester`s plight seemed of no interest at all to rajah. chester had gotten himself into a fix and he would have to get out of it himself. no sense fighting lions when they outnumber you. fight`em when you have an even chance… i had to get out of the big cage somehow, and perhaps from the outside contrive to stampede the animals toward the tunnel door. besides, i was too fond of life to risk being torn by this group of killers; for now that my animals had all lost their heads, i was inside a barred jungle-a far more dangerous place than any real jungle. at any moment the struggling pack might lose interest in the fight and turn on me. only their absorption in the grim business of annihilation one another was what had saved me so far. with my back to the bars, to prevent an attack from behind, i slowly worked my way toward the safety-cage. it would have been foolhardy to run; that would have attracted too much attention. but chester had caught sight of me and, deciding that i was responsible for all his troubles, he tried to reach me. shaking himself loose by a tremendous effort, he started toward me with hate in his eyes. he was stopped by the lion gang after he had traveled about two yards. they were all on top of him again. that brought me closer to the bloodthirsty pack and it was more important than ever that i reach the safety-cage. once more chester, eying me venomously, started for me, but his assailants had him down again before he had advanced more than a foot. if i could only reach that safety-cage i should be able to do something for him before his enemies destroyed him. he was holding his own and though he was bleeding in two or three places, there was no indication that he had been serioulsy injured. and all the while three tigers on the high seats continued to look down at the spectacle, plainly bored. rajah seemed drowsier than ever. the conduct of the crowd contrasted dramatically with the blase attitude of the striped non-combatants. all around me i could hear women screaming and men shouting. another step . . . and still another . . . and with each succeeding one a half-hour seemed to elapse. as i neared the safety-cage at this snail-like pace, theba, one of my biggest tigers, shook himself free of the milling pack and ran over and mounted his floor seat to the left of the safety-door. the lion he was battling did not pursue him, but turned against another tiger." "in his excitement theba did not notive that the tunnel door was open and that he could have escaped into the chute and gone to his cage. that is the only possible explaination of his +%!%+ conduct in climbing back to his seat. i stood rooted where i was, awaiting developments. about ten seconds later hilda, one of my better-behaved lionesses, decided to quit the fray. she also, too excited to realize the tunnel door was open, got back on a pedestal. instead of taking her own, she scrambled up on the floor seat to the right of the safety-cage! to reach the door now, i must pass between a lion and a tiger. i had no intention of attempting anything like that… what to do? i wasn`t panicky, but i was decidedly worried. and then chester made my decision for me. with almost unnatural strength he again tore himself loose from his attackers, and, teeth bared and face distorted with rage and hate, headed for me. i made a dash for it-straight between the two animals that flanked me, right and left! to this day, i don`t know how i ever made it… i don`t recall being attacked, but when i slammed the door of the safety-cage, i noticed that my shirt was torn and that my left arm was bleeding from a surface wound. theba had probably made a pass at ma as i dashed by. taken by surprise, he had not had a chance to launch a real attack; or perhaps he was content with a swipe at me. the lions were again on top of chester. they had evidently stopped his last dash before he had covered more than a yard. all around me i could hear the shrieks of horrified spectators. i was a bit dazed from shock, but my head cleared and i set to work doing what i could to break up the fight. assistants had been standing ready to pump ammonia into the arena, but they feared that in addition to affecting the animals the fumes might overcome me. i signaled them to let fly. at once several of the struggling beasts, coughing and choking, dashed for the tunnel door. only nine animals remained in the arena-seven lions and two tigers, one of the latter obviously dead. yet the lions continued to maul the lifeless body. i decided to go in and break up this remnant of the fray. one of the animals lunged for me as i neared the group, but i turned him with a blaze from my blank-cartridge gun. then, alternately using my chair, a pole, and my gun, i drove the last of the warriors from the arena-all except the two tigers. one was dead and the other, snip, was badly injured. she just managed to crawl to her cage. the best veterinary in the district was quickly summoned to supplement our own first-aid efforts, but it was too late. poor snip died three or four hours later. one of the most amazing things about this awful battle (the worst arena fight of my whole career) was the fact that chester, who had been surrounded by lions for almost the entire period of the tussle, emerged with no serious injuries. he was torn in three or four different places, but the wounds were all superfiical and in ten days he was as spry and chipper as ever." ".......in saying this i am trying to answer the question that has been asked me most frequently since i first embarked upon my career as a trainer of wild animals: "can a lion lick a tiger in a fight or vice versa?" i`m afraid that oft-repeated question, like a few others which circus fans put up to me, can never be completely and categorically answered. since lions and tigers come from different parts of the world, there is no chance of deciding it in the natural habitat of either beast. and the scraps that take place in captivity do not furnish an accurate gage. for they are usually characterized by circumstances that give one side or the other the advantage-this advantage generally being on the side of the lions, owing to their incurable tendency to gang up against any foe." although i`d be inclined to favor the lion in a finish fight, i could cite many instances of a single tiger fighting off a group of lions. in fact, my sumatra tiger chester once fought off seven lions before a crowd at collinsville, pennsylvania, and emerged from the scrap little the worst for wear. chester has been in my act for five years and is still going strong, veteran of many battles. i`ll have to admit that it is seldom a tiger can hold his own very long in a struggle with several lions that have ganged up, but i`ve seen it happen often enough, in the years i`ve been mixing the two species of cats in the ring, to feel that i can fairly cite these cases in proof of the prowess of the tiger as a fighter. on the other hand, i could bring up a certain amount of pretty convincing evidence on the lion`s side of the controversy. even while i am writting this, one of my favorite tigers, princess, is dying in consequence of a brief encounter with the maned enemy. and princess is only one of a half-dozen striped cats that i have lost in the same way since i started my present act. so there are two sides to the lion-tiger business about which the circus fans inqure so persistantly."  
 
"rex, a royal bengal tiger, was the most dependable cat i have ever trained. he went to greater lengths to avoid a fight than any other lion or tiger i have known. when the issue was forced upon him and there was no escape from a battle, he fought like a demon and usually won. his first move when another beast attacked hin was to jump to a high pedestal and remain perched there. three or four times lions ganged up on such occasions and dragged him down from his roost-and always lived to regret it. for rex was at his best when the odds were against him. of all the great cats i have handled for any length of time, rex is the only one i have never known to start a fight. but, like many another true lover of peace, when attacked he fough with an outraged fury that his assailants could not match. i once worked myself into a cold sweat keeping rex from killing theba-now the biggest tiger in my act. rex, in a playful mood, tried to play with theba, whose response was to lash out and start a fight. a terrific tussle followed. the animals were locked together, each determinedly trying to rip the other`s throat. only by dashing ammonia on them could i stop them. when i finally got them separated they were so exhausted they could hardly move. theba rolled over in a heap and was groggy for a full minute. rex moved around uncerainly and obviously too had had enough; but he had more resistance than his attacker."

Tigerboy, I've been up half the night pondering tigers as a result of your insightful posts. I don't know if I agree with you and your sources are questionable. Why do you like tigers so much? You seem pretty horny for tigers. Would a tiger beat a grizzly bear in a fight? What if 10 king cobras attacked a tiger all at the same time, who would win? Could a tiger beat Shaq in a fight, if Shaq had a 6 foot lead pipe to defend himself? Interested in your thoughts, I enjoy your comments very much.

Hey there Lionboy, 
Thank you for your enquiries. 
 
I love tigers, and i am majoring in Wildlife management right now, and is part of a tiger conservation programme which i am not supposed to disclose. 
 
My ambition since young has been to be a tiger conservation, and i do not hide the fact that I do love tigers alot. 
 
My sources are not questionable. Names and quotes i come up with can all be found or sought after through emails. It just takes a little effort.  
 
Well, grizzly bear? I think you are too specific over here. Perhaps Brown Bears is the correct term, since we are not using any specif subspecies of Tigers. 
No, i do not think a Tiger will beat a full grown brown bear in a fight. I will not favor it even in an ambush scenario. 
 
I favor the Brown Bear most of the time over the Tiger in a fair fight to the death, both fully grown and willing to engage. 
 
A lone King Cobra can kill a tiger, let alone 10. In a head to head fight, the tiger would kill a single king cobra, but will die afterwards due to venom. There's no clear winner in this scenario. 
 
Shaq? You mean Shaq o'neal? Any big cat, would kill the any humans in less than 2 minutes if it has the desire to kill him/her. No matter how strong the human is, a large tiger/lion is 8 - 15 times as strong as the human, and with lethal weapons such as claws and canines, the fight isn't really a debate. 
 
I love both big cats, i do not hate lions. I was a lionfan when i first started in this debate at AVA(sharks), predator pit forums and the old discovery AFO forums and zoological diversity society. However after years of understand and research, compelling evidence favoring the tiger has been showing up in recent years. 

For sure you wasn't the first one who found it. maybe in your opinion. Was the one who did this interview with him you? Where did you find it? What an "expert" is is up to your own opinion. Any one who knows (nearly) all abiout something could be considered as an expert, some one who knows some thing about a subject and eye witnessed much about it could beconsidered an expert, and so on, so just don't say Dave Salmoni is no expert. As i said he fvored the tiger before and changed to the lion. That he doesn't know much about ocean predators doesn't mean he doesn't know much about this debate. As you said he just worked with sharks so he meant the shark is the supreme ocean predator. As you said he didn't work with other animals. But he DID work with Lions AND tigers. At first when he only worked with tigers he favored them...but after working with lions he could compare them and favored the lion afterwards. (as i have read) And the interview is NO 17 minutes long, at least the one i mean. (was in a radio or something like this). Nice to mention Clyde Beatty again. The texts you show don't really show the tigers supremacy, they show that a lion is much more aggressive. Another advantage i forgot to mention before. In the first text as you can read the tiger was in struggle for life. EVERY creatute living gets 2-3 times the power he already has in a struggle for life, as you may know. Beatty also mentioned that he lost many tigers in fights against lions. Good that you write the text pages where you can find these texts. But as you can see the book contains more than 250 pages. Beatty is known for favoring the lion so in the rest i think he describes the lion winning. What about Sultan? He is like rex, a very well sized specimen, and won all fights against tigers, every single one! I've never read the book but i know some facts about beatty. Also, i didn't want to show the lions supremacy. I just wanted to show that a tiger is never the superior. As most experts say it is 50/50, also Beatty mantions this, and i think that's true. Some other experts say the lion wins, some other experts say the tiger wins so the average is: 50/50. And send me these sources please, wanna see them. I could sent you some documents too if you want.

Tigerboy, that's funny, at first i was a tigerfan but after seing them fighting/researching for data i favored the lion :D Just like you but vice versa. I think there is no real winner. It depends on where they fight, in which condition the are, how old, how experienced, how well fed ect. they are. Even a sick little lion could beat a large fully grown tiger if he just lands one vicious swipe(bite before the tiger does. and vice versa. So you can't really compare them, the pit fights also show captive animals and even there the rate is around 50/50. So we have to fight it out theoretically...and in this point the lion has a slight advantage but this doesn't change the winning rate cause of what i said before. No animal kills another animal for sure.  
 
 
 
PS: But just to compare the hunting success rates: A tigers success rate is 10%, a (lone) lion's 17% ;P

@ Leo: 
Honestly. I hate to say it, but you make no sense that it isn't even worth my time arguing with you. Seriously. 
 
PLEASE! i am begging you! Do some research! PLEASE 
That interview is 17minutes, brittany cut out like 1 minute of it and uploaded it to YOUTUBE with some lame photographs of lions and tigers. 
 
Dave Salmoni has NEVER worked with a wild Tiger, ever in his entire life. He has worked with wild lions in many documentaries such as "into the pride", "into the lion's den" etc.  
 
Type all the crap you want, you don't even make sense anymore. Initially you were at least putting up a decent debate. Now you are just trying to win, but have brought up nothing. You are desperate and just want to quickly type up something to reply.. 
Seriously. You make no sense. You did not even argue to even one of my points. 
 
17minutes interview here: http://animal.discovery.com/tv/tiger-week/tiger-week.html 
I found it there, download it and sent it to everyone i knew who was involved in the debate. Last Question asked was the question uploaded. Lion fans do not dare to upload the whole interview because there are too many flaws! 
 
I hate to spoonfeed you, but you can't even find the interview yourself! OMG! 
 
@ Lionboy 
We have our own opinons. It is great to have discussions with people like you who isn't bias and is willing to give and take in debate. I think we would have to agree to disagree then. 
 
But please note that most experts still favors the Tiger in the fight. So nope, lion doesn't really have any "slight" advantages. haha. 
Feel free to email those institutes, experts, zoos, reserves which i brought up. =) 
 
Furthermore, hunting success rate is fairly subjective because many variables are not taken into account, such as prey density, hunting area, landscape, terrain, prey species etc. 
You might wanna email or visit Save China's Tigers webpage, an organisation which is rewilding purebred South China Tigers in South Africa. South China tigers are the 3rd smallest subspecies of tigers living today, and well, these south china tigers have a average success rate of 22% in the plains of Africa. 
This does not mean anything, but since you brought up hunting success rate, i shall do it too. =) 
Let's agree to disagree.=)

Which point didn't i argue? The hunting rate doesn't have anythin to do with the factors you mentioned. The rate i meant was the rate killing the prey they attack. No, i won't ask them cause i know what they'll answer, the same like you. Maybe some other Zoos/Experts? And don't say i shall do researches...i DO and i found MUCH more scientific facts about these fights than you mentioned. Show me your sources please? Only these e-mails? Nothing more? Well, that doesn't really proof anything, that are ESTIMATES! As i said before, the ones who saw them fighting favored the lion.  
 
I didn't search the interview, so don't say i didn't find it! Well, what i said about Dave Salmoni was what i read of him, could be wrong, all i wanted to say is that he also favors the lion, even, after hearing the full interview, i have to admit that what salmoni sais is an estimate, too.  
 
So all you know is the story of Dave Salmoni! And some e-mails - not to say ESTIMATES - shall proof you right? I could show you some scientific renown data if you want, not only estimates. And YOU say I don't make sense? You should do some more research! Or show me the other sources! But, truely, there are more studies and documents that say the lion has a slight advantage compared to the tiger. Mention some advantages the tiger has and back it up with reliable sources. I COULD do this, at first i wanna see your sources. (not only the e-mails)

Lol @ Lionboy. 
 
All you can do is to ask for sources? When you have provided none? I have provided big names, and also i mentioned charts. Brain Charts, HRR charts, Bite Force Charts. I already told you what charts they are, you cane easily find them out there. 
 
You are just trying to waste my time over here, lol.  
Seriously, if you want to put up a decent debate, AT LEAST PROVIDE YOUR OWN SOURCES! 
You are telling me to spoonfed you! LOL! Its like "Hey Tigerboy, i have no evidence, please provide yours!" 
LOL 
Seriously, you cannot bring up anything, that's why you are asking me to. 
I told you what charts, studies i have, and they can be found. Uploaded at many places online. 
125 reliable accounts states the Tigers will beat lions. How many for lions against tigers? 
 
Why not this? I issue you a challenge. Give me 5 names! Just 5 names of top experts or institutes that favor the lion in the fight. I can easily give you over 30. Just 5 names. I bet you can't, lol. 
 
Seriously, lionfans like you make it harder for casual people to believe lions can win. You just want to reply to the debate, you just want to save your pride, that's the only reason you reply, you are not providing any evidences or arguments AT ALL! All you are doing is asking me for evidences, when you are the proposition, and you should be the one providing evidences! LOL! 
 
What lionfans fail to realise is this: When we talk about a fight, it means fighting to the death. And in the case of a fight to the death, aggression doesn't matter, as long as both animals are now trying to defend their own lives. 
 
Dave Salmoni seems to think that we are talking about a fight for dominance, which i believe lion could hold its own. 
 
Regarding a fight for dominance, is not a fight to the death. 
So what if tigers run? So what if the tiger is chased off? Does that mean the lion won? No! I have accounts of a male tiger chasing a indian rhino away, a video of a cougaress chasing a big male brown bear away, accounts of wolverine chasing bears and cougars away, single leopardess chasing away 3 male cheetahs, and even a honey badger chasing away a whole pride of Lions!! And last but not least, Domestic cats have been known to chase off Full grown american black bear. But what does all this show? All this shows that the runner isn't the loser, if the runner had stayed, it might not have lost, because running isn't losing, if the tiger stayed on to fight, the lion wouldn't neccessary win. 
 
Do you get what i mean? All i can tell you is that, even people who favors the lion admits that if a siberian tiger is cornered, if a lion and a tiger were put in a cage and the Tiger has NO CHOICE but to fight to defend its own life. It will beat a lion, because at this point, all the physical advantages come into play. 
 
Tigers have advantages physically in ALL aspects which can be calculated and measrured. Lions do not have a measurable advantage! Can you measure aggression? What is the SI unit for aggression? LOL. 
 
The fact remains that If a tiger was drawn into a fight with a Lion to the death, it will win. 
 
Please, DO NOT REPLY UNLESS YOU HAVE EVIDENCES TO PROVIDE! You have done nothing, really, more posting by you only make the lion, a sacred animal looks bad. Hone your skill, do some research.... to at least put up a decent debate instead of just crapping your way into a reply.

You started this part of debate, you had to bring some sources, you didn't. I answered, i wanted to see your sources, as you wrote you'll show it if being asked, but you didn't. I said i'll show you my sources when you posted yours and what do you? You don't want to post them. Maybe there aren't some, maybe they aren't reliable or whatever. You're satisfied with the 'expert opinions' you have. Real facts that a lion holds the record of muscle percentage for mammals in his size with 57-60% or that he is way more experienced and has a mane that protects him from a tigers attack you don't want to accept. And please: Tell me, which advantages does a tiger have? And BACK IT UP! I repeat it again: I'll show you my sources after you showed yours. These 'experts opinions' are opinions like yours and mine, most of them never saw the animals fighting. And without seing that you can't really judge. The ones who saw them fighting favored the lion afterwards, like Beatty. No wonder. You mentioned some citations of Beattys book in which the lion was not (the clear) winner. Do you know this is an old strategy used by authors and regisseurs to let the protagonist look stronger? If mention the enemys strenghts - and protagonist beats his enemy most times (if the lion beats the tiger most times), he must be even stronger. Even used by Cesar in the 'Bellum Gallicum'.  
 
You mentioned Packer in the list of experts you asked. How old is this response, could you say this please? Packer stated some time ago that he doesn't know so much about tigers. Citation: "also, craig packer stated, in response to emails which he had received from me, that he may change his statement that the tiger is the more combative. he thought, previously, that lions and tigers fought in a similar manner, and, while this is basically true, they often imploy different tactics and techniques when confronted with challengers, and really tigers are not quite as practiced at fighting. "  
 
Just tell me please, without looking it up, how much does an Amur-/Bengal Tiger weigh? How long are their canines, how much biteforce do they have, how long and how tall are they in average? And then do the same for the lion. If you have to look it up cause you don't know some of these facts, you should know that you can't judge about how the fight ends.  
 
You mention that a lion wins most of fights for domination. That isn't wrong...but you brought another wrong point: The fight to death. Tell me ONE decisive advantage the tiger has. only ONE! Don't say the biteforce or the size, or i have to show you some scientific well reknown schemes, studies and some internetsites which show that the lion has the stronger bite AND is taller. Maybe hes a bit shorter but this really is no disadvantage in a fight. Don't say the strength or i hav to show you some sites/books which mention that he has the record of musclepercantage. Don't say he#s much more agile, i could show you some video where it is tested who is the faster one. It's the tiger, but the difference is slighter than you think. Lions have up to 50% more muscle in the forequarters than tigers, therefore the tiger has much stronger hindlegs. This belongs to agility. Don't say the tiger has the stronger paw swipe, it's a bit faster but much weaker and gets lost in the lion's mane. In fights against other tiger the try to break the neck or do a throatbite, which is in 95% avoided by the lions mane in a fight betweewn lions and tigers. Just watch some videos, you'll see it clearly. Does a tiger have such an protection? No.  
 
 
 
So, all i can do is asking for sources, isn't it? And the information i bring in most of my posts you ignore, seems like you just don't see them. "I have so much more sources that it is not even funny, i would love to give more evidence if asked to. =) " I asked you more than one time...but all you do is crying that i don't show mine. You just ignore my request. Very suspect. All you do is saying how much more you know and that i don't have sources. You always say that the sources you used can be found very easily...Could be every Forum or amateur site. No scientific proof. 125 reliable accounts? is reliable for you everything positive you read about the tiger? Do you know the slogan "If you believe all you read, you should not read."? And they can also easily be found? Just like a tigerfan forum in which you can read the lion has 2 inch canines and 400 pound biteforde and a tiger has an average weight of 300kg and 5 inch canines/over 1200 pound biteforce? I think this is reliable for you. Weak. Another non-proof. 2What is the SI unit for aggression? LOL. " Umm, lol. Did you ever hear of the method of testing the testosterone percentage in the blood of the animal you test? No? No wonder. You just want to look important, you pretend to know much about the two animals. Actually you don't, actually you didn't bring ONE FACT in this debate! You back your opinion up with estimates, the only better reknown expert you mentioned was packer, but he changed his opinion. There are thousands of zoos and experts in the world, you mention just few (i think you knew before that they favor the tiger)...You want to give me 30? I thought you have about 200? What happened to the other 170? or are they, as i said, unreliable, favoring the lion or just don't exist? I never really searched for experts opinions, i read some along the way searching for other facts and nearly every one said the lion wins/it is 50/50. Why i did not show my sources in my post? I didn't save them, i searched these facts over a long time and took the most reliable ones or made an average of the facts i found. But i could search them again. From some of them i know where to find.

LOL @ leo getting worked up here. Relax, you are taking this too seriously. Have a life, if you do so much research for conservation, many animals could be save. 
 
Regarding Aggression levels.. and testerone levels. Hence, they may have a direct relationship, however please take note that testerone level is not a KEY indicator for aggression! 
 
Testosterone is mainly used for sperm count, and fertility. Aggression has not really been indicated by testerone as it may be an indicator, but a flawed one at best. I didn't want to bring that in, because i was taught in my wildlife management course, NEVER to use testosterone as a key indicator for aggression level, as an animal with lower testosterone level may actually be more aggressive at any given point of time. 
 
Here is a testerone study conducted: 
I shall use some charts provided by lionfans against you. http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/collectionofsemenfromlionsandtigers.jpg 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/serumlevelsoflionsandtigers.jpg 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/liontestosteronelevel.jpg 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/tigertestosterone.jpg 
http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk45/brentlion_2008/brentonlion/tigermeantestosteronelevels.jpg 
 
 
So according to all these Charts, Lions and Tigers have similar testosterone level! However, yes, lions do have slightly higher testosterone level, but that is only when comparing Wild Lions with captive bred Tigers. 
 
Furthermore, if you notice, Tigers have higher testosterone level than Leopards in these studies! Guess what? Leopards have been popularized by many experts as the most "aggressive" big cat. Your beloved dave salmoni brought a Leopard to "Tonight Show" and pinpoint Leopard as the most aggressive feline. 
So why does it have a lower testosterone level? 
 
Furthermore, studies of Tsavo lions have pinpointed it to have very low testosterone levels! Even lower than that of captive lions/tigers shown in the chart above! Guess what? Tsavo lions are known by many as the most aggressive lion population in the world right now! 
 
Testosterone level is not a key indicator of Aggression, as mentioned, it is a good indicator of fertility and sperm count. And of course, sex drive. 
 
The strength of Paw Swipe is actually deduced from the HRR(Humerous Radius Ratio) chart which comes from a PDF file conducted by a unversity. 
 
Anyway, here is the chart study on HRR of felines which talks about Big Cat's strength pound for pound(relatively to their size). The lower the HRR(Humerous Radius Ratio), the stronger the feline's forearms is lb for lb. 
 
This comes with the Chart:"Tiger score 2nd highest, while lions score the lowest of the big cats. 
The cheetah forms one extreme in having the longest and most lightly built limb bones of 
all the big cats, which enables it to run at very high speeds. 12 It should be noted that the 
relative length of its anterior limbs are significantly longer and less massive than it is for 
those felids that inhabit a more dense terrain (e.g., P. onca). The cheetah has a radius/ 
humerus length ratio of ca. 1.0 and an ulna/ humerus ratio of about 1.16, which is almost as 
high as for the highly cursorial wolf (1.02 and 1.20). This facilitates the animal a longer 
"forearm" in relation to its size. In contrast, S. fatalis exhibits the shortest relative limbs with 
a radius/ humerus ratio of around 0.79 and an ulna/ humerus ratio of about 0.97. The jaguar 
displays the shortest humero-radial and humero-ulna ratios among the living big cats with 
0.82 and 1.01 closely followed by the tiger, the cougar and the leopard, respectively. The 
lion has proportions that fall somewhat in between those of the cheetah's and those of the 
other pantherine cats with ratios of approximately 0.90 and 1.04." " 
 
 
Here is the chart for your reference: http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/7043/hrrsw4.jpg 
 
So from this chart, we can deduce that the World's strongest living cat in terms of forearms strength is the Tiger, however the Jaguar is stronger lb for lb. And it also shows that at equal weights, the Tiger is significantly stronger in terms of forearms strength compared to the Lion. This means that Since Tigers are usually heavier than lions, they would be much stronger in terms of forearms strength. Take note that even at the same size, the tigers score better in terms of HRR, so even at the same size, the Tiger's paw swipe should be stronger than that of the lion's. 
 
As for bite force chart, there are many of them, most of them indicates that the Tiger have a higher bite force than the Lion. 
These charts are from scientific tests and research done on real live animals, unfortunately for the time being i am not able to provide more information for you because my computer has crashed just some time ago and i have lost many information regarding this subject which i had done research on a long time ago. I had another chart specifically on Paw swipe force of felines, which compares the paw swipe of different felines, unfortunately i am unable to relocate it now. 
 
Regarding Craig Packer, i just emailed him i think 2 months ago, he still thinks that tiger has a general advantage over the lion. Please feel free to email him. I bet you never emailed him yourself before, brentlion aka damon kept trying to debate with Craig Packer. Craig packer is a busy man and just replied that so that damon can stop harrassing him. Seriously.... Do you know how many emails damon send to Craig Packer a day? =X 
 
LOL! So experts and zoologists that work with lions/tigers on a day to day basis such as Randy Miller, Bronx Zoo Staff, Singapore zoo staff, the staff of all those institues i mentioned are not credible? LOL! Let me tell you what! It is because they favor the TIGER! If they favor the lion, you will be nuthugging them right now! OMG! 
 
Let me give u another name! David Hackenberger! He favors the tiger, email him! Don't know who he is? Watch "into the lion pride". He is dave salmoni's mentor and staff at bowmanville zoo. Dave Salmoni said that "Michael Hackenberger told him everything he knew about animals." Guess what? HE FAVORS THE TIGER! 
 
Tigers are better than lions in terms of IQ/EQ 
Here is the chart to prove that: 
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/2526/eqandbfqchartqw2.png 
 
I also have direct accounts of Tigers hunting in streaks and seems to have higher IQ than lions in terms of hunting together. I can provide this as long as you ask for it. 
 
Now, Bite force. Tigers in general have a quite sizeable bite force advantage over the lion. 
This is indicated in the Bite force study here: 
http://intern.forskning.no/dokumenter/wroe.pdf 
 
Regarding size and weight. Remember, Tiger is the undisputed Largest cat on the planet. There are 2 types of lionfans, one which isn't bias and accept facts would admit that tigers are the biggest feline today. 2nd type is like you, Bias and time-waster, who don't really know much about big cats and thinks that Lions are larger than Tigers in size. 
 
Let me just tell you that, you can google this or research this. In recent years, there are no Male Bengal Tiger in the wild, full grown, other than in the sundarbans which weigh less than 200kg! Lions on the other hand, frequently weigh 185kg or less! 
Lionfans have to be humble at times, Size is an advantage for the tiger, this has been there since the beginning. What are you guys gonna argue next? Lions have more stripes? LOL! 
 
Let me tell you something, Tigers are THE WORLD's LARGEST CAT! This is an undisputed fact. A handful of you think you guys can change the world by just providing a chart which has 10 wild lions? LOL! 
 
Seriously, you have lost. Now you are arguing for the sake of arguing. You are really not worth my time. I probably will not reply to your next reply because you are not supporting your case at all! 
 
You say that staff from bronz zoo, san francisco zoo, san diego zoo, srirach zoo, Central park zoo...etc etc... Randy miller..etc are not credible? Are you kidding me? 
This destroys all your credibility. You are a BIAS lionfan, seriously. Whatever you say from here on, don't make a single sense. 
 
Tigers have size, strength, weight, longer canines and longer claws, and much higher IQ/EQ compared to lions IN GENERAL! DO NOT provide a chart wwhere 10 animals are used! Provide one where at least 50% of the population is used, because in GENERAL tigers have all these advantages! People working in sanctuaries, parks, zoos know these because they work with lions/tigers daily. I bet you haven't seen a lion without a cage infront of you before. 
Please take note that its been said that 90% of the statistics ONLINE are not accurate. You can give me fake statistics and wrong charts which only covers the minority of the species. 
 
AGAIN, instead of asking me for sources, provide me with yours.  
AGAIN, you directly look pass my challenge to you. Bring up 5 names of experts who are favoring the Lion right now! I want the 5 names(dun include Salmoni and Clyde) at the top of your next post, or else i will not even care. 
 
You know you are fighting for a lost cause. But.... unfortunately, you cannot put your pride down. Enjoy your life, spend your time wisely. Research more on conservation and saving wildlife instead of wasting time here.  
 
 
Majority of people on Earth, and experts..will still favor the tiger at the end of the day. How many people can you change with your twisted facts? =X

"AGAIN, you directly look pass my challenge to you. Bring up 5 names of experts who are favoring the Lion right now! I want the 5 names(dun include Salmoni and Clyde) at the top of your next post, or else i will not even care. " AGAIN i have to say i never really searched for experts opinions cause they're just estimates. AGAIN i have to say that you pretend to know everything about these animals and you hide behind one study and some nothing saying websites. Probably belonging to the 90% of wrong stuff. Where got you your information from? Where are scans of books you used? Very strange you cannot see in the scheme used in http://intern.forskning.no/dokumenter/wroe.pdf that the lion has 243 Newton more biteforce than the tiger, measured in the SAME STUDY! But you only take and show what favors the tiger, even if it leaves out the information that the lion is better in some points. You#re not even better than the tigerfans on youtubes which show 2-3 seconds of a fight between lions and tigers in which the tiger lands some swipes...and than cutting the video before the lion takes the tiger down. It's just the same. You wrote some posts before i just want to end the debate in a quick way with an 50/50...what do you? "This destroys all your credibility. You are a BIAS lionfan, seriously. Whatever you say from here on, don't make a single sense. " Compare it? "You know you are fighting for a lost cause. But.... unfortunately, you cannot put your pride down." Compare it? When i am biased, you're biased too. (Just look at your name...and mine.) When i want to end the debate in a quick way, you want it, too. But in a worse way. Compare your posts to Damons? You don't like Damon don't you? Why? Just because he proofs you wrong? Just because he has way more information than you? At first i thought you are some one that really can proof that the tiger is stronger, but you aren't. All you can do is (for the hundreth time) posting some estimates and nothing saying sources. You have two studies: The one that sais the lion has the weakest forequarters and the cheetah the strongest, the tiger the 2nd strongest. 1.: After posting this study you say the tiger has the strongest...the study sais other things. 2.: You cannot judge the strength because of the proportions. "The  
 
lion has proportions that fall somewhat in between those of the cheetah's and those of the  
 
other pantherine cats with ratios of approximately 0.90 and 1.04." "" What did i read there? Approximately? Somewhat in between those of the cheetah's and those of the other pantherine cats? You want to proof your point with another estimate? To say it in your language: LOL. The second study was the one which prooves that the lion has the stronger absolute biteforce...but in a mystic way you showed a scheme of this study i've never seen before...how long did it take you to find it? It's the only scheme of this study that only shows the BFQ, not the absolute Biteforce which is the lions strength: He has 243 Newton more biteforce. So again: this proves othing, just google lion biteforce and you'll find the whole scheme very fast. Now, let's come to the size: It's common sense that the tiger is a bit longer than a lion, that's right. Longer? Longer. Not bigger. Google lion shoulderheight, it differs between 1m and 1,25m what you can find. Wikipedia sais the lion is taller, every study sais the lion is taller, and so on. Maybe 2% in the internet say the tiger is taller - not belonging to the 90% which say the lion is taller what's totally wrong, isn't it? No way, you can't proof anything in this way. next subject: The intelligence. Most social animals are more intelligent than the solitary ones. The HUMAN (Just a note, he has an EQ of 6-8, a tiger 84.4...so tigers are over 1 times as intelligent as a human? Exiting!), the dolphin, the monkey, the wolf and so on. Do you know WHY they're Compared to solitary animals, of course. A mouse or a sardine lives in a social way, too...but that's not in comparison to solitary animals because the majority of these kinds of animals lives in prides. So, why are they more intelligent than their solitary compagnons? They have to plan how to fight, where to chase the prey to get them in the trap, when to go where and so on. A tiger has just to be quick. Tigers mostly ambush their prey so it is killed within seconds...if it survives the first attack it'll run...many animals the tiger hunts are very fast so he has to be fast, too. So you can see he only really needs his hindlegs - for what would he need strong forequarters? if he had stronger hindlegs, stronger forequarters and a stronger bite, he would get the record of musclemass in percentage - not the lion. But it's vice versa, the lion has 57-60% muscle (i found a scan some days ago that proofs the facts of musclemass and the record, i'll show it to you when i see it nagain). I am arguing just to argue? What sense would this make? Only not to give up? "LOL." No, it could be just fatal i some one believes what you're saying, i don't want any one to believe something wrong. Where are my facts twisted? Hm? Since you confused length, size and weight, no one will believe you. In which way are 20 cm more body length better than being 20cm taller? Tigers advantage? i don't think so.  
 
Not let's come to Dave Salmoni/David Hackenberger. If he was his mentor and favored the tiger, he had teached him that the tiger is the winner, for sure...but why does Salmoni in spite favor the lion? Why did he change his mind, hm? I don#t think just for fun!  
 
 
 
In another way i can understand you. If i've also found only the sources you give, i probably would also believe in what they say. But they are way not the only ones. The tiger is in no way better than the lion. They've over 99% the same genes, if the tiger was so much bigger, stronger, more intelligent and heavier, the lion would look like a cheetah beneath a tiger. But irt doesn't. And vice versa it isn't. The differences are slight. And explain: How would a tiger win in a fight? Throatbite? no chance? Neck break? no chance. Other effective attacks? The tiger doesn't really have. Just his swipes but they aren't so strong. If you wanna have some data about this debate, just look at damon in the other dicussion about lion/tiger fight. I know you don't like him...why? Just because he brings data that say the truth? To get back to the direct fight: The tiger can't hurt the lion in an effective way in the short Phase of fighting opportunity (he has a worse stamina than lions, proven many times). The tiger will get exhausted too fast...and after that the lion kills him easily. The mane offers great protection. Doesn't mean it's inpenetrable but for it's enough for the tigers attacks.  
 
 
 
 
 
PS: It doesn't matter for me whether you reply or whether you even read this, Tigerboy. I just don't want that any one believes the "facts" you bring. No one should be misinformed.

This fight is to determine the apex predator. Is it the lion or the tiger. The only reason this fight is between the lion and the tiger is because the grizzly is omnivorous and not considered as a true predator, even though at times, the grizzly does go hunting. 
 
Over at "siberian tiger vs grizzly", Old Grizz is waitting for all of the lionboys and tigerboys.  
 
It has already been determined that the average brown bear of 600+ pounds is the ultimate carnivore ( Carnivora ). Now the fight belongs to the average grizzly ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) which is 5.5 feet long, 3 feet high, and 490 pounds. Old Grizz is ready for a fight. What big cat has the courage and ferocity to fight an angry grizzly?

HAHA, Leo. You lost. =) 
Clearly, you cannot provide anything. No source, no links, no references, no charts, no studies to show anything. 
 
Anyway, Dave Salmoni has never favored the tiger, he favors the lion all along. Don't talk about AFO, Adam Britton, crocodilian expert mentioned that Dave favors the lion since the beginning, but because Samantha Stevens wanted to try and argue for the lions in that episode, they switched roles. By the way, right now, Samantha stevens favors the tiger. 
=) 
 
You have provided no evidence, and keep repeating the same points. Dave salmoni, dave salmoni...dave salmoni.. lol. that's all you have. I brought up randy miller, 20 years more experience in big cat training than dave salmoni. I brought up Michael Hackenberger, the mentor of Dave Salmoni, and owner of Bongo, the lion which mauled Salmoni. You can't argue against them, and you keep saying dave salmoni dave salmoni.. lol. 
 
You lost, clearly. I bring up new evidences, you just keep repeating ur points. You are arguing for the sake of arguing. You have no evidences to prove that lion is superior. All you can do is to twist your sentences and words, to try and defend against my actual data and statistics. Lol. you have no support on your side. So sad. =( 
 
Enough said, Tiger is greater than lion. Size, strength, weight, intelligence, claw size, paw size, canine size, bite force, paw swipe, and of course, popularity. You are trying to pit the lion, against the "World's favorite animal"(google it). 
 
As i said, try your luck next time, you can do better with more research, instead of copying and pasting what Damon/brentlion posted on another forum. 
 
Enjoy yourself. =) 
 
@ Toby. 
Tigers, having more interactions with brown bears in the wild, will have greater chance than lions in a fight against a Bear. However, against Brownies and Polar Bears, I don't favor the tiger. I've got a friend who is involved in Bear Conservation, and i frequently contact him via email. The statistics and feats he shows me about Brown bears is just tremendous, any big cats, even the best feline, the Tiger seems to have no distinct advantage over a Brown Bear.  
 
Grizzilies on the other hand, are smaller in size than the average brown bear, but seems to have ferocity to counter its lack of size. Tiger vs Grizzily will be a great debate, much closer than lion vs tiger. 
=)

"All you can do is to ask for sources?" "Let me just tell you that, you can google this or research this. " ;) As i said :) " I already told you what charts they are, you cane easily find them out there. " I copied ONE time what he said - so bad? As i said you don't like him, cause he has way more/more reliable sources ;) I thought you won't reply or read my post without these names? You seem to be too enraged to let it be :P Funny to see you answering^^ but OK, i'll search it again and post it here. could take a while but i'll do it. That Salmoni preferred the tiger before i read on youtube...it was on the animal face off, i think. If Hackenberger was his mentor, he teached him for sure the tiger is the stronfgest cat. So it's nearly logic he preferred the tiger at first. 
 
 
 
"Tiger vs Grizzily will be a great debate, much closer than lion vs tiger." - "...just tremendous, any big cats, even the best feline, the Tiger seems to have no distinct advantage over a Brown Bear." Nice to see how unbiased you are ;) Your studies said NOTHING, look on Damons documents, you'll see the truth...but you won't, you're feared to get convinced.

@ leo:  
I have no idea what you are saying, LOL. You are not even on the same topic anymore. 
 
Regarding what you previously said about HRR and IQ/EQ. I think you misintepreted it wrongly. LOL. HRR shows the CHEETAH has the weakest forearm to body strength ratio of all the cats, pound for pound, followed by the lion, the 2nd weakest. Jaguar has the strongest forearm strength, relatively(as shown by the chart), followed by the tiger. 
 
Regarding Damon, lmao. Only lionfans nuthu him. The truth is that, no one finds him credible. Seriously, got to AVA sharks, AVA yuku, Animal verse animal yuku. Carnivora etc.. Dun go to wildanimalelite (because he is the admin, lol!) 
And you will see how hard he is bashed, and how incredible he is. Guess what? He photoshops accounts and pictures in an attempt to lie that lions can defeat tigers. 
 
Look at his current signature at Yuku! LOL! 
 
Enjoy your life. work hard, spend more time research on conservation. You will find that many of the things in life is very sad, and you can do more to help. Do you know that over 95% of captive lions are not purebred? They are just panthera leo, Lions in general, not purebred lions like P.L. Krugeri etc. 
 
Send some emails to zoos, ask about their conservation goals. Find out more about SSP, EPP programs.. maybe that will help you gain more general knowledge about animals, not just lions. 
Enjoy your life.

The world according to Damon: 
 
Lions are the same size as the Bengal tiger. Siberian tigers are smaller than either. A lion can kill a tiger. A grizzly can kill a tiger. A lion can kill a grizzly. Join the fight at: Siberian tiger vs grizzly~

One on one, I reckon it would be a fairly even fight. I'm not sure who would win, but I don't think it would be the same outcome every time. 
 
 
 
I'd like to see a cape bull buffalo against a tiger, one on one. Now that would be a hell of scrap. Although I imagine they'd probably avoid each other, as the result could easily be fatal for both.

For those of you who believe that a lion cannot kill a tiger in a face-off, you are wrong. The lion will win 4 out of 10 fights.

I think you people should comment on who will win between a Bengal Tiger and a Siberian Tiger.

the lion will win because they are born to fight from their birth. they fight eachother, the hyenas, leopards and many more animals. tigers are solitary, but they hunt small animals, they can't kil an african bufallo that one lion will kill. and it is known that 90% of buffalo's death is caused by a lion. the lion is also taller than a tiger. a lion is 4 feet tall, while a tiger is 3 feet tall. a video of a lion killing a tiger is also on youtube, y'all go check and see who the real winner is according to the scientist

It depends what tiger fights which lion. In true reality. No tiger can stand to a full grown grizzy bear or rhino. It takes more then 6 lions to take down a white rhino. Who is siberian tiger next to rhino. Even a spanish texus bull will give it the horns one shot. That specific bull fights for death. Full grown crocs will destroy any tiger on land or water. Strongest bite force. TIGERS ARE TOUGH BUT OVERRATED.All these videos are old. Look at new ones. Tigers might be only good for black bears. I study animals Not fake stuff on the net. Dont even think of a bull elephant. Not even 7 siberian tigers.The skin of an elephant is even to thick for the bite.Maybe a bull walrus. Even that is a challenge. I see all the net videos. 90% are fake with tigers.They are tough though but 2 a point. These are true facts.

The tiger as more competition because he lives by himself. Dhole dogs are more likely to fight tigers because they are only fighting one tiger but never lions because lions have back up and this back up can be up to 20 individuals. And tiger like Sam said fight bears and 3 different kinds including brown bears, both lions and tigers live with elephants, rhinos and leopards. Lions know buffalo but tigers know guar which are bigger and more dangerous than cape buffalo and both cats know crocs. But the tiger would still win he would take a beating yes but he would more likely be the victor.  
Also the tigers competition is bigger and stronger than those of lions.

YOU decide at: ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com/topic/2/master/1/?page=1

Sorry, that last didn't work. This will. You can decide who is the ultimate carnivore, the lion, the tiger, or the brown bear at: 
 
ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com/

Genuine quite high quality footage from 1946 of a lion vs tiger fight. Although the encounter is filmed in India, the lion is Indian, one of a then almost extinct Indian variety. Sorry to all you tiger fans, but the tiger is left badly beaten up. The action begins about 7 minutes in to the 13 minute clip.  
 
 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJhd4F6YO90&feature=related 
 

http://ultimatecarnivore.yuku.com

@Mike...Thats a good video. The only one I found on the net where the fight is not edited to favour any animal. 
I would say 60-40 in favor of lion(Male lion of course). Lionesses dont stand much of a chance.

Lioness vs Tigress = 40/60 
Lioness vs Male Tiger =10/90 
Male Lion vs Tigress = 70/30 
Male Lion vs Male Tiger = 60-40 
 

This news can be found at: 
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/06/117_36355.html 
 
I give the content below.. 
 
 
 
 
By Kim Rahn 
Staff Reporter 
 
If a lion and a tiger fight, which will win? 
 
At a zoo in Jeonju, North Jeolla Province, a lion did. 
 
A male lion killed a female tiger by biting her in the neck at Jeonju Zoo around 3:40 p.m. Wednesday. 
 
The incident occurred when the five-year-old lion, named ``Cheongi,'' fell into a trench five meters below his yard, which segregates the pen from zoo visitors, while attempting to catch a chicken that a zookeeper had thrown to him. 
 
Right after the lion's falling, the tiger, six-year-old ``Hobi,'' who was in her pen next to Cheongi's, jumped into the trench. ``Hobi, excited while watching it, jumped down to the trench. She made a poor landing, then Cheongi attacked her, bit a fatal spot, and killed her,'' the zookeeper said. 
 
The lion and the tiger were similar in length, but the former was heavier by about 20 kilograms, weighing 110 kilograms. Hobi, a Siberian tiger, was moved to the zoo in 2006. 
 
``It is rare that a tiger and a lion fight. The lion seems to have thought the tiger invaded his territory and attacked her,'' the zookeeper said. He said that the outcome of fight between a lion and a tiger depends on which gets a head start and which is more aggressive, adding that neither animal is always superior to the other.  
 
The zoo plans to donate the body of the tiger to Chonbuk National University. 
 
 
 
 
.......  
 
As a special note the tiger was a Siberian Tiger but the lion had not much difficulty killing it. Its even mentioned that the lion was heavier by about 20 kg, so that means Siberian tigers are not really the biggest cats as some people keep harping on about. 
 
Quote 
" He said that the outcome of fight between a lion and a tiger depends on which gets a head start and which is more aggressive, adding that neither animal is always superior to the other." 
 
 
I totally agree with that. 
 
Regards to all Tiger and Lion fans

The tiger is nearly extinct. There are now more tigers living in captivity than in the wild. If you were to check out the size of the "natural tiger vs natural lion... the big cats before human's totally dominated the planet, when the tigers numbered well above the 100,000 mark in Asia and lions roamed Europe, Asia, and Africa, the lion averaged roughly 400 pounds while the tiger averaged roughly 500 pounds. In today's human-infested world, the lion averages roughly 375 pounds while the tiger averages 425 pounds. In Asia, a single tiger can drive off a whole pride of lions from his hunting domain. 
 
http://ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com

Its not a matter of size alone. Its matter of which animal wants to win or to live.  
 
As regards size I have seen on Animal Planet a wild cat,barely 2 times the size of a house cat drive away a pride of lions.It was defending its babies and ready to fight to the death. Does that mean the wildcat is the superior beast? 
 
Its the will to win no matter what size or circumstances that define the victor. 
 
Now if your life were to depend on the outcome of a tiger vs lion fight to the death which one would you back?  
 
Thats the ultimate test.

IF my life had to be bet on either the lion or the tiger, I would say TIGER without a second thought. 
 
http://ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com

Lion and tiger both live in India 
 
but rarly meet. Lion vs tiger the 
 
winner would be the older one

the best way to describe the tiger,  
TIGER IS KING OF KING.

Lion vs Tiger vs Brown Bear at: 
 
http://ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com

Lion vs Tiger depends on where u r from.  
if u r from asia tiger wins the fight. if u r from africa or europe the lion will win the fight.  

I am from the USA and the TIGER wins.

I am from Mars. We have not heard of lions, but we know they will win.

lion easy... lol jk i have a fucking properly functioning brain and dont lie up late at night whacking off over lions. come on people the tiger is the bigger animal with the heavier muscletone and bigger canines. the lion is much thinner and the mane wont make a difference when matched with the tiger 4 inch canines.

"lion easy... lol jk i have a fucking properly functioning brain and dont lie up late at night whacking off over lions. come on people the tiger is the bigger animal with the heavier muscletone and bigger canines. the lion is much thinner and the mane wont make a difference when matched with the tiger 4 inch canines." 
 
 
 
As to bigger, studies indicate that, given the same food intake, the two animals will be the same size. 
 
As to heavier muscle tone, lol. If you actually LOOKED for impressive lions, I can garantee you you'll find 'em. 
 
As to bigger cainines, yes. But that's still not enough to make up for the lion's advantages. 
 
As to thinner, keep in mind that the two animals weigh approximately the same (190 kg each), the tiger's head and body length is greater than the lion's by about 15 cm. The guy who made this site SERIOUSLY messed up the vital stats for the two animals. The lion weighs the same, but is more compact and bulky. But the tiger is somewhat more flexible and agile, due to its longer spine and more even distribution of weight. 
 
As to the mane not making a differnece, it makes it difficult to figure out where the throat joint and spine actually are. It also provides TOTAL protection against the tiger's claws. 
 
Finally, keep in mind that the tiger is a solitary animal that HATES fighting. The tiger has a range that overlaps over the ranges of several other females. If it looses a fight over mating, it has half a dozen other tigresses it can mate with. The lion, on the other hand, has a pride. The pride is an all-or-nothing deal. It can't just say "here, I'll take this half, you take that half." If it looses a fight, it looses its mating rights for the ENTIRE PRIDE, not just one female. As such, it will be more motivated to win a fight, and willing to face more extreme odds.

lol sucks to be a lion

@ laawl. 
 
lol sucks to be a lion  
 
 
 
The system works. The result is that only the best fighters get to pass on their genes. That's what it comes down to. Sure, the lion still helps hunt, particularly with big game items, but the primary job, the one that is most integral to the lion's existance, is that of a fighter. Powerful selective forces act on the lion's physical and psychological characteristics, resulting in a fighter of a higher caliber than that of any tiger.

" lion easy... lol jk i have a fucking properly functioning brain and dont lie up late at night whacking off over lions. come on people the tiger is the bigger animal with the heavier muscletone and bigger canines. the lion is much thinner and the mane wont make a difference when matched with the tiger 4 inch canines. 
Posted @ Saturday, December 18, 2010 7:13 AM by yeeebitches " 
 
@ yeeebitches 
History and evidence says otherwise, but of course you know better.

this vote thing is dumb. lion would defenetly win against a tiger I read books and seached that lions are better than tigers!!!!!!!!!!!! 
 

mojo history and evidence doesnt say otherwise. you do. the tiger is 100 pounds heavier than the lion. i know people arent comparing the siberian tiger to the lion because the lion would be annihilated within seconds. yes a lion could kill a bengal tiger theres a 50/50 chance of the fight going either way. tiger and lion fans argue away with me. im mutual with both sides.

the tiger is 100 pounds heavier than the lion. 
 
 
 
Not on average it isn't. The Siberian tiger project gave an average weight of just over 190 kg, same size as most populations of lions. 
 
 
 
i know people arent comparing the siberian tiger to the lion because the lion would be annihilated within seconds. 
 
 
 
<a>http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=VGUhAAAAIBAJ&sjid=hocFAAAAIBAJ&pg=877,3889749&dq=rifleman+lion+tiger 
 
Yeah, a tiger in its prime needed the help of a rifleman to "annihilate" a 12 year old lion. (That's an octogenarian in lion years.)

dude lol your obviously a lion fanboy that dude was just being the middle man. i have to agree the siberian tiger would kick 7 shades of shit out of a lion. a lion has never grown to 900lbs thats the weight of the worlds largest siberian cat and the average at 650lbs compared to the lions 550lbs. now let me make something simple for you genius. lions kill prey because of assistance of their prides. a tiger will kill an animal by itself. a lion will fight with other pride members not to the death but to establish rank. if tigers fight its until the death theres no rank only one will be victor. if i fight was to happen its one vs one the lion has no assistance. its simple. between a bengal and lion its 50/50 and dont say lions grow bigger than than tigers they dont. a tiger has bigger canines more power and a much more vicious nature. my money would be on the tiger everytime thats my opinion. dont give me all this biased information based on other lion fans view points. im not interested i watch plenty of animal planet and discovery thank you.

dude lol your obviously a lion fanboy that dude was just being the middle man. i have to agree the siberian tiger would kick 7 shades of shit out of a lion. a lion has never grown to 900lbs thats the weight of the worlds largest siberian cat and the average at 650lbs compared to the lions 550lbs. 
 
 
 
Problem is that you don't have your figures straight. The largest siberian tiger on record was 771 lb. The average given by the Siberian Tiger Project for the tiger is 190-210 kg, or 420-450 lb.  
 
 
 
now let me make something simple for you genius. lions kill prey because of assistance of their prides. a tiger will kill an animal by itself. 
 
 
 
The lion only needs a pride because of the lack of cover on the savanah. If a tiger were dropped out in the Serrengetti and managed to avoid being killed by some nomadic lion, he would die of starvation within a week. Not enough cover for him to aproach prey. The male lion has been observed taking full grown cape buffalo SOLO on numerous occasions. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
a lion will fight with other pride members not to the death but to establish rank. if tigers fight its until the death theres no rank only one will be victor. 
 
 
 
*FACEPALM* 
 
You really know nothing about these animals, do you? Do some f***ing research, that portion of your response doesn't even deserve a thought-out counterargument. If you knew ANYTHING at all about big cats, you would know how dumb you sound having said that. 
 
 
 
if i fight was to happen its one vs one the lion has no assistance. its simple. between a bengal and lion its 50/50 and dont say lions grow bigger than than tigers they dont. a tiger has bigger canines more power and a much more vicious nature. 
 
 
 
Pound for pound, and these animals are effectively the same in size, the lion is stronger than the tiger. The lion is simply a more compact animal with more muscular shoulders, a deeper chest, and a more heavily reinforced humerus. All of those traits are indicative of "more power." As for viciousness, that's a completely unfounded claim and entirely impossible to quantify.

http://www.wildtiger.info/siberian-tiger-13-feet-long-900-pounds-on-www-youtubebooster-net/ ummmm theres the information. and many other websites have accounts of the 900lbs siberian tiger and before you say this tiger is obese its not. there was a tiger that weighed 1200lbs but was very OBESE and didnt live long. mellivoracapensis stop favouring the lion your giving the tiger no credit its very childish. where no in kindergarden here people. every single animal planet and discovery channel website state the tiger is bigger and packs more power. i would quit now mate because no ones listening to you.

Some youtube video made by a brainless lion-basher? That's the only source you have for 900 lb tigers? How stupid are you?  
 
 
 
Siberian tigers are naturally fatter than both lions and bengals anyways, no surprise that they tend to be slightly larger on average. The difference is, of course, marginal. 
 
Now, back to Bengal tiger vs lion. The lion would win due to its more compact build, its ability to absorb damage, its stamina, and its greater agression/determination.

mojo history and evidence doesnt say otherwise. you do. the tiger is 100 pounds heavier than the lion. i know people arent comparing the siberian tiger to the lion because the lion would be annihilated within seconds. yes a lion could kill a bengal tiger theres a 50/50 chance of the fight going either way. tiger and lion fans argue away with me. im mutual with both sides. 
Posted @ Friday, January 07, 2011 4:49 AM by miketyson 
 
miketyson, thats like saying a fat man would beat Bruce Lee because hes 100 pounds heavier than Lee. 
 
Dude, There is no better fighter among the big cats than the male lion. Tigers have more fat(not muscle) in their bodies than lions . 
 
Ever seen a male lion and a tiger together? The lion is pretty calm and casual, but the tiger is apprehensive and fearful.  
 
Cos it knows who the boss is.

The tiger is bigger and more muscular...even though the mass of this animal is unbelieveable it's still much, much more Igile than the lion, this is due to the stucture of the bone. You cannot see the tigers muscular body as it's covered in thick fur.the lion isnt bigger or heavier but is stiffer int he bone...even though he lion is very protected by it's big mane the tigers teeth [ the size of an adult mans middle finger ] with powerful force would surely pierce through the lions skin. the lion would be in so much pain it would be difficult to fight back under so much pressure so the tiger would wressle and keep a fixed position in the lions skin. this would end in serious injuries for the lion and posibily death. the lion would have to surender either way .

oh and dont believe animal planets program "animal faceoff" as they were sued by NatGeoWild for incorrectly stating that the lion would win a fight against a tiger.

wow brother your not BIASED at all this lion vs tiger thing is a never ending battle. actually mojo the tiger is covered in FUR not fat. a tigers forelimbs and body is thicker by ALOT than a lions. I would say a pokemon battles more realistic than that animal face off thing. and brother its more like Mike Tyson (Tiger) Vs Bruce Lee (Lion). A heavy weight boxer vs a technical fighter. In all fairness its 50/50 but based on OBVIOUS logistics im saying tiger. even though the Lion is indeed King of the beasts for its beauty.

mellivoracapensis you call others lion bashers yet you bash the tiger and give no credit where credit is due. you make it look like the lion would win everytime. dude thats like saying my goldfish could kill 8 great white sharks. the thing that interests me is you complete obsession with the fact the lion has to win. in your eyes the lion grows as big as king kong if not bigger. A tiger is more robustly build has more power and a weight advantage.. but WAIT before you present me with all this information that probably you have created yourself hear what i have to say. Its 50/50 a lion and tiger are capable of killing eachover without a doubt. the lion is beautiful okay im not here to bash your lion. but in all realism a lion would have to wear the tiger down to kill it which could prove difficult when the "rage of the tiger" kicks in its a vicious onslaught of powerful attacks done by the tiger if threatened to the limit. if the Lion survives the onslaught it can win its simple as that wear the bigger,stronger cat down then go in for the kill. i actually hear the Tiger is more vicious by nature depending on itself only. anyways peace my brother dont bash what i have just said to you im not going to argue back. im off to watch a dvd

The tiger may be king of the JUNGLE, but the lion is definitely my one and only king. It's a beast in bed!

Lion rules the big cats and no fat ass tiger is gonna usurp his place.

lion is king of the grassland king dom and tiger is a emperor of the forest

ok lets put it this way, wild lion vs wild tiger, average weights and size. lions hunting will usually make a kill every 8-9 times out of 20, tigers 2-4 out of 20, why? tigers are lone hunters so it will take more energy to get the kill. lions have a pride and therefore have a better chance at the kill. lions fight whenever they get the chance to get the compotition away from there pride, tigers try to avoid injures period because unlike lions, they dont have a pride the can rely on to get the next meal, so injure could mean death, lion beats a tiger a large part of the time.

lol.. the debate still rages.. 
 
all right its a draw then...lion vs tiger ...both of them are losers if they fight... 
 
now lets get on with some serious issues like global warming, unemployment etc..

All right just ignore my earlier mail.I know what comments are going to come. 
 
"DA TIGER CAN SOLVE ALL PROBLEMS LIKE GLOBAL WARMING AND UNEMPLOYMENT, BUT DA LION ONLY KNOWS HOW TO EAT. SO TIGER IS DA BEST". 
 
lmao

DA TIGER DOES NOT FART AS MUCH AS DA LION SO DAT MEANS TIGER HELPS IN CONTAINING GLOBAL WARMING WHILE DA LION CONTRIBUTES TO IT. 
 
DAT MAKES TIGER THE WINNER. 
 
lmfao

http://ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com/forums/66/Public-Forum

yo the site above isn't that good, it basically a lion hater site. I'm not just saying that because I like lions better, this site has way better arguments on why a tiger would win then this guy does. 
 
I think he just got pissed at the popularity of lions towards tigers and how this argument can drag on and on with no end when he has such an unmoving opinion on the matter. 
 
But seriously this site is better for better facts and references for both arguments. 
 
I'd like to say lions would win 6/4 against a tiger but in reality it's a coin toss chance 50/50 everytime. Their are to many factors and the difference in aggression, size, speed and other factors is very similar yet a lot of people are distorting this by increasing that difference. The fighting styles of both beasts might differ but that doesn't determine the fight. A fight is not simple and calculating easy unless theirs a huge difference between both contenders. These animals are very similar and this would be a 50/50 chance. 
 
so really it wouldn't matter which side is picked but i'll put my money on lions

sorry the first part seems confusing what i meant is http://ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com/forums/66/Public-Forum 
 
this guy is not very helpful and the link is not better then this site. The people above give better arguments on why tigers would win. Some of it is repetitive (actually the beginning was like a broken record, in fact I thought the lion people had a better argument in the beginning and then the tigers near the middle then Damon had really good arguments)but moving on the posts on this site are a lot more informative then the link above.

I never saw more lies about the lions, ABSOLUTE LIES, about the most beautifull and the most brave animal on earth and that is male lion... 
 
 
 
1.THE FIRST FACT: 
 
 
 
Research made by the russian scientists in 'The siberian tiger project' shows that average Siberian adult male tiger ( older than 35 months )weights 176,4 kg; and largest Siberian tiger that the russian scientists captured and measured weighted 205 kg; they calculated that the asymptotic limit for male siberian tiger weight is 222,3 kg(Wikipedia,Siberian tiger). 
 
 
 
Average male lion weights 181 kg ( Nowell and Jackson, wikipedia, lion). 
 
 
 
Notice that we compare Siberian tiger (largest tiger subspecies ) with average lions ( South African lions tend to be 5-10% heavier than the rest of the lions ), so average weight of south african lions is larger than 181 kg! 
 
 
 
people don't take hunter over-overestimates that will make elephant out of the ant! 
 
 
 
2. THE SECOND FACT: 
 
 
 
The heaviest tiger was bengal tiger that weighted 272 kg (Wikipedia). 
 
 
 
The heaviest lion in wild was man-eater that weighted 313 kg ( Wikipedia ) also 272 kg male lion shot around Mount Kenya ( Nowel and Jackson, wikipedia ). 
 
 
 
They say average male bengal tiger is 235kg and record weight was 272 kg ?? This is ridiculous. If we go that logic lions would weight more than 235 kg ( and we know for sure that they dont )on average since they have bigger records in the wild? 
 
 
 
3: THE THIRD FACT: 
 
 
 
Look at lions roar( 8km ),its so powerfull and loud that can frighten any animal, while tiger sounds like pussycat (3km) (Wikipedia)!! 
 
 
 
I absolutely and deeply believe that full grown male lion can chase or kill full grown male tiger in most cases! Male lion try to dominate any animal and will never retreat, but if he does go back thats because he dont risk serious injuries.  
 
 
 
I am so sure about male lions that I would put my life. not just money, on lion in batle against tiger. 
 
 
 
I have no time more, here is wonderfull video that shows what is a 250 kg male lion: 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvoyMq84GO0 
 
 
 
Also beautifull song: 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apEuFdzP5ZU 
 
 
 
Also, 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoNmQX09rX0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Also people hear this: 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2gq5fwbk-Q

Here is interview with ANIMAL PLANET expert Dave Salmoni. He knows tigers very well, he trained tigers to rewild them in South Africa. He favours lion!! 
 
 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A64glNYb-NM

I changed my mind.  
 
The heaviest lion was African lion, which weighed 272 kg 
 
The heaviest tiger in wild was man-eater Bengal tiger that weighted 313 kg (Wikipedia). Another 272 kg male tiger was shot around the River Ganges (Nowel and Jackson, Wikipedia).  
 
They say the average male African lion is 235kg, and record weight was 272 kg ?? This is ridiculous. If we go with that logic tigers would weigh more than 235 kg (and we know for sure that they dont )on average since they have bigger records in the wild?  
 
Look at tiger's roar (8km). It's so powerful and loud that it can frighten any animal, while tiger sounds like pussycat (3km). 
 
I absolutely and deeply believe that full grown male tiger can chase or kill full grown male lion in most cases! Male tigerss will try to dominate any animal and will never retreat unless he risks serious injuries.  
 
I am so sure about male tigers that I would put your life, not just my money money, on a tiger in a battle against a lion.

We know that you know how to copy, change and paste texts, roflcopters. Your infantile games don't work, no one believes you. And before you have the idea of posting under my name - I won't post in the next days, anyone who does and calls himself Leofwin is not me then.

Average siberian tiger weights 175 kg!

Don't mess with a lion!! 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pda4zULB3EA&feature=related

http://ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com/

Jesse "LULZ" James  
 
You my friend are a complete dumbass. Heres why, Siberian tigers are the biggest land carnivores on the planet. they can reach up to 10 ft long (with no tail) and they can grow to be 5-5 1/2 ft tall. Their fangs are 4" long. Tigers and Lions bite force compared. Lions 400 to 600 lbs, Tigers 1000 plus lbs. Not to mention there are videos of tigers literally killing lions and tigers are faster, stonger, and smarter. If you ask me, thats one dead lion.

Largest siberian tiger 205 kg. 
 
Look just this shamefull video, hunters catch siberian tiger with sticks, yeah with sticks: 
 
 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRwhXk8oJdY

Kenny, you can't be serious. The siberian tiger is not the biggest land carnivore, still bengals are heavier and tigers and lions are equal in size, generally. Not in weights where the tiger has a 10% advantage but in size. Siberian tigers hardly reach 10 feet at all, tail included. They average around 9.7 feet while bengals average 9.4 feet and lions about 9 to 9.4 feet - just the averages. However the longest measured cat was a lion. And there are several records of lions being quite a bit longer than the longest tiger. They grow up to 5-5 1/2 feet high? Where the hell did you get this crap from? The biggest wild measured cats were both a lion and a tiger with 114 cm shoulder height - andthe tiger was a Bengal. Lions have a shoulder height of about 10% higher than the tiger's. Tiger fangs are 4 inches long but the longest lion canines are just as long as the longest tiger canines. However the tiger's canines are around 1 cm longer - 1 cm more which sinks in the lion's mane. Honestly, do you think longer canines will help the tiger in any way? No. They'll sink in the mane, just as the claws. While the tiger doesn't have anything like that. And, their bite force is quite much the same, I even have some studies indicating that the lion has a slightly stronger bite. But all in all they're rather equal there, as in nearly every other point. Look it up in any (non-edited) study, video or what ever, you'll see it. And, there are videos of tigers literally killing lions? Care to post them? I've seen quite a lot of videos of lions fighting against tigers but in most cases the tiger is running. Or do you mean that ones of the tiger landing two swipes and then it switches to the next scene? Without showing the actual outcome of the fight? I guess you do. But, listen, the outcome in most cases is the same: a running tiger. There are no videos of these animals killing each other on youtube or anywhere else (just reported accounts, in favor for both sides). By the way the only account of one of these animals killing the other ended with a dead tiger. Tigers are faster? Now decide: Are they faster or heavier? Both won't work so good. Yes, they throw jabs faster than the lion does but those are rather weak and cause no damage. As I mentioned before the claws sink in the mane while the tiger doesn't put his full power behind his punches, thus no damage is caused. While the lion delivers less swipes in the same time - but these one strike in almost every case (while many of the tiger's swipes fail) and that with a lot of force put into them. Also the lion's fighting technique enhances balance. All in all the lion is a better fighter. The tiger is stronger? I guess you're new to this debate, thus you haven't seen all the data. But, it was proved that they're equal in strength with a possible edge for the lion. And, tigers are smarter? At first, where do you want to know this from? The tiger's brain is few percents bigger than the lion's but size means nothing there. Still a raven is more intelligent that a sheep and still the human is more intelligent than an elephant. Then intelligence depends on what it's used for. For example the slime mold is superior to the human in terms of traffic planning. By the way the additional brain volume decreses the space neccessary for masseters, thus the tiger has less muscle to chew and it would be reasonable to suggest that the tiger's bite is weaker than the lion's - not by much but it should be. In the end no one asks you and it's not a dead lion, it's nearly like a coin toss, could go either way (as many experts say, in terms of built anatomists say the same - equal), with a possible edge for the lion.  
 
 
 
And, LIONS HEART is right, the biggest siberians in the recent time only reached 200 kg or a bit over. In the past they reached much higher weights but if you talk of that time you should also mention the Barbary lion which reached the same weights. Unfortunately it's extinct now.  
 
 
 
If you disagree with anything I said here, I'll be happy to show proof. And then, show me where you got your information from...

"Tiger fangs are 4 inches long but the longest lion canines are just as long as the longest tiger canines. However the tiger's canines are around 1 cm longer - 1 cm more which sinks in the lion's mane. " - I meant the tiger's canines are 1 cm longer on average. 
 
 
 
"By the way the only account of one of these animals killing the other ended with a dead tiger." - The only account in the wild, I meant. I typed it but didn't work somehow.

http://ultimatecarnivoran.yuku.com/forums/66

yaa bakın ben her kapışmaya baktım vidyolardan aslan kaplanı öldürüyordu ve kaplanın kilosu 250 aslanınki ise 350 yani bir dişi aslanla bir kaplanın kilosu aynı ama erkek aslan onlardan daha büyün kg si 350 ayıyı yendi erkek aslan kaplanıda öldürdü siz diyosunuz hala kaplan daha büyük yan yana bi dursun bakalım hangisi büyük

i feel like this isn't fair the size advantage is huge and i believe this is a lioness. i could be wrong.

After over 20 years in the field closely studying both animals, I would have to say the lion would win 80% of such fights. Tigers while solitary animals are also much more skittish where a lion is more likely to provoke a fight and a tiger more likely to turn away from one. Male lions live solitary lives after being run out of their pride until they are strong enough to challenge for a pride of their own. When they have a pride they must fight off challenges from other male lions often. Male tigers on the other hand rarely fight anything close to their own size and strength. These sites are mainly popularity contests with no real knowledge of the animals they speak of. As a wildlife biologist my colleagues and I agree the lion is the true king of beasts.

Brilliant Michael, I know very well that lion is king of beasts. More people vote for tigers win, because tiger is world's favourite animal, so its expected. Tiger is here discussed against lion, not lion against tiger! Siberian tiger is on average smaller than the south african lions, or Ngorongoro male lions, last research shows that clearly, like it or not, that's the truth. Adult male lions are born to fight, thats their almost only role, besides mating! Thats why their manes evolved, to protect neck and vulnerable parts. Combination of deep frightening roar and mane that makes lion bigger have a huge intimidation effect. 
 
Watch this video of a male lion, 15-20 hyennas don't dare to come close, also notice how lion, with injured leg, is relaxed in presence of huge number of hyennas. 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxJY4ywHCQM