Who would win? A bear or a tiger

If we're talking in the same weight division, I'm going with tiger, especially if it has somewhere to hide and pounce from.

If they're just in a featureless arena and can see each other clearly it's more of a toss up, but I'd still go for tiger.

Aztechnology said:

Are people in here joking? Any larger bear would annihilate a tiger. The weight, muscle mass etc. If they got swipes on eachother the tiger would be dead quite quickly. It's like the scrawny 90 pound kid who took Taekwando for two years in your class thinking he can fight the 6'4 300 pound varsity linebacker.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Grizzly bears and Siberian tigers are quite similar in size and weight.

.

I guess it depends on the type of bear. Grizzly and polar bears would win most encounters.

Bear down, the worst animal on television

I think you guys are underestimating Tigers.
Tigers are excelent runners, swimmers AND climbers, also they actually prey on humans. Even the smartest bear will not actively hunt for humans.

While mass and muscle advantage is clear on the bear, the tiger a very smart hunter that will use its surroundings to its advantage. I've seen both animals up close, and while I fear facing a bear, I would dread to even be near a tiger looking for me, since death will come before I've even seen it. Tigers are amazing for how can such a massive animal be so goddamn fast.

A grizzly or a polar bear is probably the most brutal predator on land.

Dream Machine said:

If we're talking in the same weight division, I'm going with tiger, especially if it has somewhere to hide and pounce from.

If they're just in a featureless arena and can see each other clearly it's more of a toss up, but I'd still go for tiger.

Grizzly bears and Siberian tigers are quite similar in size and weight.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Upper range of Siberian Tiger is around 400lbs, Brown and Grizzly gets up to 1,300lbs+

Tigers may be pantherinae, but they are still cats in the end. Aka. built for speed and agility. Their bones are much too brittle compared to a living hulk like larger bears that typical outweigh them at least by 1.5x. And that's the females. Male bears are MUCH larger.

I think unless the tiger is desperately hungry, it runs like a bitch from a grown bear.

This is like big show vs rey mysterio.

Aztechnology said:

Upper range of Siberian Tiger is around 400lbs, Brown and Grizzly gets up to 1,300lbs+

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Siberian Tigers are not that small:

It weighed about 300 kg (660 lb). Unconfirmed weights between 318 and 384 kg (701 and 847 lb) and even 408 kg (899 lb) have been stated in dubious sources.[14][15] An unconfirmed account refers to a male tiger shot in the Sikhote-Alin Mountains in 1950 allegedly weighing 384 kg (847 lb) with an estimated length of 3.48 m (11.4 ft). A captive Siberian tiger named "Jaipur" allegedly reached a body weight of up to 465 kg (1,025 lb).[16]

In the 1980s, the typical weight range of wild Siberian tigers was indicated as 180–306 kg (397–675 lb) for males and 100–167 kg (220–368 lb) for females.[8] Exceptionally large individuals were targeted and shot by hunters.[17]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_tiger#Body_size


Obviously still pales in comparison to the size of a Grizzly but Tigers can be massive too.

A Honey Badger enters the battle and scares off both the Tiger and Bear.

Tux_ said:

Bears are good at taking down fish, Tigers hunt solo and eat shit much bigger than them.

Im giving it to the killing machine over the oversized salmon hunter.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Bears eat bison

Aztechnology said:

Upper range of Siberian Tiger is around 400lbs, Brown and Grizzly gets up to 1,300lbs+

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I got Grizzlies weigh 400-790 pounds and Siberian tigers weighing 400-700 pounds (both having larger outliers that end up getting hunted) with my wiki and google fu.

I'm saying it's not crazy to find some in the same weight division for our pretend fight.

A grizzly can behead a moose with a single swipe and send its head airborne. It's bear all day.

Xiaomi said:

A grizzly can behead a moose with a single swipe and send its head airborne. It's bear all day.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This sounds like hyperbole lol.

Anubis said:

This sounds like hyperbole lol.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-grizzly-bear-knock-a-persons-head-off-with-one-swipe-of-the-paw

Grizzly Bears have apparently been known to be able to knock the head off a bull moose with one swipe of their massive paws. This sounds incredible, but apparently it has been documented perhaps a dozen times over the past 150 years.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Weight is always 90% of the equation here, and you need a particularly small bear and a particularly large tiger for the numbers to work out in the tiger's favor. If we're talking a large brown bear or a polar bear, the bear wins every. single. time. The raw strength of a large bear cannot be overstated. No terrestrial predator is taking down a healthy 1000-1500 pound polar bear.

A bear would win. You want the tiger to win because it's cooler, but it wouldn't.

Hippo vs bear would be more interesting

Bear, for sure.

In a ring or cage match the Bear would win, but in the forest I'll give the advantage to the Tiger.

This question has been done so many times, I believe it was even on an episode of QI.

The answer is Bear, easily, it was done in the days of the British empire with animals brought into London from all around the world. The Bears always won, Tigers and all cats have very light bones, one swipe from a Bear sees them shattered whereas a Tiger can't really do much against a mass of muscle, fat and fur.

bear, they did this stuff in the past.

it's always the bear.

Xiaomi said:

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-grizzly-bear-knock-a-persons-head-off-with-one-swipe-of-the-paw

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That doesn't sound like a reliable source.

Mr Spasiba said:

A bear would win. You want the tiger to win because it's cooler, but it wouldn't.

Hippo vs bear would be more interesting

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Hippo vs bear would be even less fair. The hippo would win without even trying. An *average* male hippo has about 1,800 lbs on the largest polar bears, putting it well over double. Average vs. average that bear is fuuuuucked. Top-end hippos push 7,000 lbs, which is a comical disparity. At that point, shy of a particularly pissed off elephant the only thing that wins is a well-armed human.

One duck-sized Tiger vs 1,000 bacteria-sized bears, but the bears are inside the tiger's colon.

Khabib

Where are they fighting?

More importantly: who's the top and who's the bottom?

If it's a grizzly or polar bear, they win no contest. Bear might get injured, but he'll just eat part of the tiger and sleep it off for a few weeks.

Mavis said:

This question has been done so many times, I believe it was even on an episode of QI.

The answer is Bear, easily, it was done in the days of the British empire with animals brought into London from all around the world. The Bears always won, Tigers and all cats have very light bones, one swipe from a Bear sees them shattered whereas a Tiger can't really do much against a mass of muscle, fat and fur.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

In natural settings Amur Tigers overlap with Brown Bears in Russia, and both species have been recorded killing the other in altercations. Usually the party acting first has the advantage. In a caged setting, bears have the advantage of bulk typically.

This not being the nr1 answer shows that Tekken is not as relevant as it used to be .

Generally these match ups would be decided by mass, in which case most species of bear would have the edge. No tiger is in the same league as polar bears, for certain.

A bear could pick a tiger up by the scruff and dangle it like little kitten.

Mr Spasiba said:

A bear would win. You want the tiger to win because it's cooler, but it wouldn't.

Hippo vs bear would be more interesting

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That's more of a mismatch than the current contest. Hippo would win in all circumstances.

Hippos are 2-3x bigger than bears, have enormous mouths and teeth, and are not solitary ambush predators that have to worry about minor injuries that could impact hunting. Bear is getting bit in half.

pretty sure a large grizzly bear would just club the tiger until its skull shatters, they are insanely strong, and those paws are like swinging tree trunks

kswiston said:

In natural settings Amur Tigers overlap with Brown Bears in Russia, and both species have been recorded killing the other in altercations. Usually the party acting first has the advantage. In a caged setting, bears have the advantage of bulk typically.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Your natural environment example is interesting, but I think malnourished animals taken out of their environment and cage fighting in 19th century Britain is the best way to determine this, though. Don't you think?

I mean if you put them on arena? Bears pretty much always. In natural setting? More even. From wiki:
''Tigers can tackle bears larger than themselves, using an ambushing tactic and jumping onto the bear from an overhead position, grabbing it by the chin with one fore paw and by the throat with the other, and then killing it with a bite in the spinal column. Tigers mainly feed on the bear's fat deposits, such as the back, hams, and groin.''

Bear.

A big bear can get shot by a rifle and still be going strong.

Siberian tiger hunt black and brown bears so I am giving it to the tiger.

Kasey said:

Baby bears are super cute. If I ever stumble on one in a forest I would pick it up and give it so many hugs and kisses.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

If you see a baby bear in the forest you leave it the fuck alone, the mother is probably near by and mama bear ain't having no human treating her babies like a teddy bear.

Mr. Poolman said:

I think you guys are underestimating Tigers.
Tigers are excelent runners, swimmers AND climbers, also they actually prey on humans. Even the smartest bear will not actively hunt for humans.

While mass and muscle advantage is clear on the bear, the tiger a very smart hunter that will use its surroundings to its advantage. I've seen both animals up close, and while I fear facing a bear, I would dread to even be near a tiger looking for me, since death will come before I've even seen it. Tigers are amazing for how can such a massive animal be so goddamn fast.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yes, but it's not you facing the creatures, or a human.

I would be far more terrified of a Tiger than a Bear.

That doesn't mean I think a Tiger could take a large bear like a Kodiak. Kodiak's size and strength is ridiculous. It's far more durable, thicker skin/fur, more fat, more muscle, and a stronger paw/bite.

Despite the fact this is heavily weighted to the bear (due to rather obscene mass differentials), we should try to appreciate how badass cats are pound for pound.

Try to make an 8 pound housecat do what you want without hurting it (and getting hurt yourself). Now try an 8 pound dog. lol.

Did y'all not watch Khabib versus Conor?

Does the tiger get prep time?

Dominic Decoco said:

Bear would win.

Fact, bears eat beets. Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

So bears have pink urine?

Depends on the species. There's a big difference between e.g. a black bear and a polar bear.

1 vs 1 in a pure fight the Bear would win but in a real world fight? Always the Tiger. She is a pure killing machine.

Triple H

KillerMan91 said:

"Tigers mainly feed on the bear's fat deposits, such as the back, hams, and groin.''

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...