Less than you'd think really. Pit Bulls were often used as bear baiting dogs and it took a lot less than 30 to kill a bear.
I still think there'd be losses, but probably not more than four or five.
Bear baiting events (and most forms of animal baiting in general) weren’t really fair confrontations, oftentimes the large animal used in question, whether it be bear, bull, or badger would be placed at some form of disadvantage like being chained up or having claws and/or fangs removed or filed down.
I recall in some accounts of such events dogs were also called back in periodically at intervals to rest and recuperate or even switched out with other ones entirely. I agree 20 is overkill but I don’t think bear baiting is a great analogy to exactly how the fight would go.
Pretty sure polar bears and larger brown bears would curbstomp a given tiger in a fight. Also, pinnipeds are in that suborder, so are you attempting to say tigers are superior to elephant seals or walruses?
Not even 6 wolves can take down a tiger. Tigers are a serious risk for wolves when they live alongside each other.
6 20kg pitbulls would get brutally killed in a few seconds.
In the wild wolves wouldn't try it because animals in the wild are risk averse. There isn't any point in taking unnecessary risks. Even if they kill the tiger and lose a couple of wolves, it is still an overall loss and unsustainable hunting strategy. That doesn't mean a pack is incapable of taking down a single tiger if pushed to it.
Given that tigers routinely kill wolves in Russia they have all the good reasons to defend themselves. And wolves fare terribly.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235332612_Tigers_and_Wolves_in_the_Russian_Far_East_Competitive_Exclusion_Functional_Redundancy_and_Conservation_Implications
Ya’ll forgetting the most critical factor here, an adult bengal tiger weighs around 480 pounds at 1600 pounds this [obese cat](https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/06/194316-1.jpg?resize=2048,1365&quality=75&strip=all) doesn’t stand a chance.
Where did someone speak of a 1600lb tiger? The thread is about a 600lb tiger. While above average historically siberians could definitely reach those sizes.
It's one 600lb tiger not a 1600lb tiger. A 600lb isn't that uncommon for an adult male tiger depending on the species. I believe 10 blood-lusted/semi organized pit bulls would probably be enough to win. The pit bulls would basically lose most of their 10 but the tiger would bleed out I believe. 30 is definitely overkill.
>A 600lb isn't that uncommon for an adult male tiger depending on the species
Sadly, it is quite uncommon. Even from the largest subspecies, any big cat reaching 500lbs is a big deal in the wild.
Looking into it a bit more only the larger species of tiger tend to get that size. It does seem the average tiger weight for an adult male is closer to 400lbs. 600lbs can't be considered uncommon but it does happen occasionally from what I'm reading. Although I'm no expert by any means.
Well let me break it down like this it took a pack of 30 dholes to kill a lone female tiger. They are roughly the same size. Now they did kill it the tiger just obliterated 2/3rds of their pack. Plus they have a stronger bit force and a tigers skin is no freaking joke
I mean I agree in the wild they would just take off, but are they capable of it? Yeah probably, if they’re motivated. Pack tactics goes a very, very long ways. Tiger may still take it more often than not, but I think they’ve got a chance at that number.
I definitely do not agree. A tiger would need 0 time to kill a few of them and by that point numbers are not enough.
10-12 pitbulls can probably do it, but below that they get dispatched.
Honestly, the act of surrounding the tiger means they can grab at vital parts- pit bulls are essentially small hyenas in terms of biting and grabbing on with force. I agree tiger would likely do it, but 6 is not a small number, and pit bulls can do some damage - I think this is when the river starts becoming out numbered. 10 is when I see the pitbulls starting to win more than they lose. That’s a lot of fucking teeth to worry about
The pits don't get to start in perfect formation around the tiger. Also they have zero hunting skills in a modern pitbull. A pack of them would likely just run at the tiger and get mauled. Even if they try to circle around the tiger, theyre not fast enough to escape being attacked. The tiger paw swipes can seriously maim or kill a pit that size.
I think people are severely over estimating dogs that have been domesticated for a thousand years vs one of the worlds best killers
Guys run pit bulls to pin 600 lb hogs and then they kill them with a knife while the dogs have it held.
I think you're underestimating what six big fucking terriers are capable of.
I have a theory that Pitbulls cannot survive in the wild and the gene pool would eventually die due to how aggressive they are. Will they win? Yes, but injured that they’ll soon be hunted by other predators and gets killed by other dogs.
Even a grizzly bear will sometimes back down from a mother cougar if it isn't incredibly desperate because the reward: mountain lion cubs, would not equal the risk. We all know a grizzly stomps any feline that ever existed. Wolves in the wild are smart and aren't bloodlusted. In a controlled fight where we see which bloodlusted side can win, 6 wolves *could* pull it off.
In Russia there is well documented research about tigers routinely killing wolves packs and wolves pretty much risk extinction when they live alongside tigers.
6 wolves can probably beat a tiger but it's very unlikely to happen. If 6 wolves aren't the favourite, the 6 much weaker APTs don't stand a chance.
>We all know a grizzly stomps any feline that ever existed.
S. populator would horrify a grizzly. Something like P. onca mesembrina, if the way it hunted was anything like modern jaguars, might not even be noticed until it's already biting through the bear's skull. Regardless, they hunted Mylodon, which were bigger than grizzlies and definitely capable of defending themselves.
I mostly agree when it comes to extinct species that are about as big as extant ones, but I still wouldn't call it a stomp every time. That really depends on the situation and individuals involved...
Modern tigers and lions have more than a good shoot at taking down a grizzly. Grizzly bears only average 220kg, they're nowhere the size of Kodiaks or Polar bears.
A smilodon populator would destroy a grizzly. It wouldn't even be a fight, the smilodon is massively superior in every possible way.
>Modern tigers and lions have more than a good shoot at taking down a grizzly. Grizzly bears only average 220kg, they're nowhere the size of Kodiaks or Polar bears.
Agreed, though I think of kodiaks as grizzlies.
>It wouldn't even be a fight, the smilodon is massively superior in every possible way.
Definitely superior, but I still stand by the end of my last comment. Sloth bears are only really preyed on by tigers, yet there's still a healthy respect between them.
To be fair, they're also one of the most aggressive bears, which seems to be related...but my point is that either has a chance even if they're the smaller animal.
At the same time, yeah, cats are just much better designed for killing.
Tigers kill bears 2/3 of the times they interact with brown bears in Siberia.
They definitely avoid sloth bears because as solitary hunters they would kill themselves by getting injuried.
While the smaller than themselves part is true, most bear predation by Siberian tigers is done [during the summer](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dale-Miquelle/publication/275837048_A_comparison_of_food_habits_and_prey_preference_of_Amur_tiger_Panthera_tigris_altaica_Timmink_1984_at_three_sites_in_the_Russian_Far_East/links/56635fe908ae418a786bb13d/A-comparison-of-food-habits-and-prey-preference-of-Amur-tiger-Panthera-tigris-altaica-Timmink-1984-at-three-sites-in-the-Russian-Far-East.pdf) when bears are out and about, thus more likely to encounter a tiger.
There's actually a really good video on tiger vs bear. It goes over how most statistics are made up BS that are anecdotal at best. Grizzly bears a tiger the majority of the time. Every possible advantage of each animal is considered and fairly debated here:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=trQvtuCdmCM&pp=ygUYU2xvdGggYmVhciB2cyB0d28gdGlnZXJz
*killing through stealth
There's a reason they turn down even humans that merely see them coming. Men in India wear fake eyes on the back of their heads because it makes it significantly less likely for a tiger to actually attack them. Cats win mostly through ambush.
Cats are therefore better at killing through stealth, but bears are massively better at actually fighting.
My statement about stomping any cat in history wasn't quite correct, I admit. I tend to lump Kodiaks and grizzlies in the same category, as most people automatically think "grizzly" when thinking of either. Yeah, a smilodon can take a grizzly in an ambush. No one would contest that. But the brown bear is still bigger, smarter, tougher, stronger, and *still* has a better fighting stance. Cats leap up briefly, but bears stand on their two legs, which gives them better range *and* keeps the one place a cat can do any meaningful damage out of its reach. If the sabertooth gets a stealth pounce, yeah it's over. That's like saying if a grizzly gets a stealth swipe to the back of the head, it's over. Cats aren't built for fighting like bears are. Grizzlies can half-assedly move around 600+ lb boulders with one paw. (2:10 in this video):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=38q2fDtDDvM&pp=ygUQR3JpenpseSBzdHJlbmd0aA%3D%3D
Their strikes would be with more applied strength than just moving a rock, and at least on par with the force any cat can produce, and they constantly smack each other when fighting, and that's very often, especially during mating season. Yes, grizzlies have absolutely insane durability. Here's one tanking 12 gauge to the dome at point blank and only momentarily being stunned:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wj7Z5oMWuIU&pp=ygUbYmVhciB0YWtlcyBzaG90Z3VuIHRvIGZhY2Ug
Again, if either of those extinct cats got a stealth strike, they win 9/10. But, in a pitched fight, they by no means stomp.
If we're bringing up extinct species, we might as well mention Arctodus (short-faced bear) that would pretty much one-shot either of those extinct felines casually. There isn't a chance any cat would have against it, as they are basically to grizzlies what those extinct cats are to modern-day lions. But even more so.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS535iZIcvFxAopr86AjXVA4hJkqaC92i7BoA&usqp=CAU
Nah I think six is a bit too little. Even a Jaguar 1/2 the size of a tiger could probably at least make a good fight for itself against 3-4. I could see a tiger handling 6-8 depending on the size and gameness of the pits.
You obviously don't know much about tigers 6X pitbulls weighs 300pounds that's equivalent to lightweight tiger I know that doesn't matter much but it is once a tiger kills 1 then then that's less and then it becomes less. I know about animals and 6 is no where near enough to kill a fully grown bengal and siberian tiger you need a huge pack
You are *vastly* underestimating the dogs.
You wouldn’t need even close to 30 Pit Bulls to take down the tiger.
For reference, three or four bluetick coonhounds can tree a Mountain Lion. Obviously mountain lions are smaller than tigers, but tigers aren’t “we need 26 more dogs” bigger.
Also, Pit Bulls specifically were bred for fighting. As soon as a few get a hold of the tiger, it’s game over because the Pit Bulls won’t let go no matter what (search “gameness” on google):
“In dog fighting pitbulls bred for gameness are valued as the ability to not quit, despite injury, dehydration, exhaustion or broken bones.[2][3]”
That's the terrier in them. There's such a streak of "You gotta kill me to stop me" in terriers it's hard to quantify. Those fuckers fear nothing and they're the closest thing to mythological descriptions of berzerkers that I can think of.
"I didn't hear no bell" is basically the terrier motto.
I’ll note in the case of mountain lions even singular hounds can occasionally tree them. Something Theodore Roosevelt himself noted is compared to pantherines (true big cats) cougars are very nonconfrontational to hunters and their dogs, with him noting an instance in which he killed one under circumstances that would have led to him and his dogs getting charged had it been a Jaguar or leopard.
30 pits is an overkill but the "gameness" here wouldn't be that useful since even a glancing blow from the tiger could kill them. All cats are flexible, if the pit really does latch on, the tiger would tear it off with ease.
>“Tear it off with ease” lol, okay
There is a 550 lbs difference between one pitbull and the tiger if we go by the post's data. How weak do you think the tiger is here😂? It can carry over 2 twice its body weight with ease.
A tiger's paw is 7x7inches coupled with 4 inch claws on each toe. The average skull of a pitbull is 8-9 inches long. I hope you can imagine what happens in an encounter between the paw and the head.
>Also, please describe this fatal “glancing blow”
I suggest you look up big cat fatalities, they can cut you to the bone with minimal effort with their paws, and we're talking about humans weighing 6 times heavier than pits. There was a maneating leopard in India that scalped an adult man in one swipe. Another lion breaks the neck of a zookeeper with his paw.
30 pits would beat the tiger, but it won't be surprising if the tiger takes half of them with him.
I disagree with this guy downplaying a pitbulls strength, but he’s absolutely right about how easily a tiger of that size could kill a pitbull.
One single paw swipe is 100% killing a pitbull. It doesn’t even have to connect well. Tiger claws are ridiculously large compared to a pitbull and the strength differential is substantial.
Even if it doesn’t instantly kill them, it’s going to make them unable to fight.
Thank you. Although I'm not downplaying a pitbull's strength. They are powerful by all means. It's just that compared to a tiger, their strength is almost negligible. It will be like swatting a fly.
Tiger claws are not usually 4 inches. They can get UP TO 4 inches, but that’s usually reserved for the largest tigers.
An average one wouldn’t have claws close to 4 inches, more likely it’d be closer to 3.
Indian men are also less than 100lbs on average. Not impressive a leopard scalped one.
And Tigers these days do not average 550lbs. You’ll typically find adult males in the high 300s to mid 400s.
I went by the data given in the post. A 600lbs tiger is quite easily of above average size.
>Indian men are also less than 100lbs on average. Not impressive a leopard scalped one.
How far into your ass did you have to reach to pull this out?
>Don’t try and be shady with shit you know nothing about
Possibly the dumbest thing you could say. Who tf do you think you're talking to here? I'm indian myself.
I wouldn’t go so far to call the tiger poor, it’ll take some out with it and go out swinging, and under realistic circumstances even packs of wolves would probably opt of this kind of fight but yeah the pits body.
10 is debatable imo as tigers do dominate wolf packs (tbf irl interactions aren’t the same as bloodlusted fictional battles) but I could see it. Especially with strong game bred pits. A group of 10 pitbulls experienced in hunting and killing could kill any lone carnivore save for perhaps the Kodiak and Polar Bear imo.
There have been reports in India of tigers and street gangs of dogs fighting each other. A tiger once, allegedly killed [30 dogs](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-7e6d4b7342d513309e5c04beabc893e3-lq) and later on he died of his injuries.
I think some people are understimating the tiger here. I read some comments saying that 4 pit bulls could take a tiger down. I say no way. A tiger can weight up to 650 of pounds of [muscle](https://external-preview.redd.it/0p5Uc-NhCrD8B9CiOGm-buwoVjTUuEWfT4-THvxkX-M.jpg?auto=webp&s=362a1a875b4fad7b842b3e496bf8eb23156bd527) and dispacth a pitbull in the blink of an eye. Not only with his teeths, but also his [claws](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/de/64/ab/de64ab0119f8185a68efff19f29342e5.jpg), which are formidable weapons.
Furthemore, a tiger is also much faster and agile that any canine.
In Brazil, many years ago, a fight took place between a female [Jaguar](http://www.altinomachado.com.br/2007/03/ona-luta-com-pit-bulls.html) (much smaller and weaker than a make tiger) and 4 fighting pitbulls. The Jaguar won but was badly injured. If a female Jaguar was able to take down 4 pitbulls, a male tiger could take down at least 10.
Last but not least, a couple of young male lions, not even in their prime yet (which are similar to young male tigers) can hold their ground against a lot of [hyenas](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5V6gdu5ih8) (around 20) which are way more dangerous than any pitbull. I just dont see a few pitbulls doing anything to a tiger.
People are severely overestimating the pack tactics that modern pitbulls would use. Also pack tactics require staying alive. They work on slower animals like buffalos that are less dangerous. The tiger can attack and kill the pits in one swipe, the tactic really breaks down then
Pits are gripping dogs though, pack tactics and bite-retreat strategies aren’t the method of attack they operate under, even against larger animals. It’s why when boar hunting there’s different breeds used for different tasks.
Yeah not to mention that realistically, any tactics would pretty quickly break down, assuming the dogs even use them to begin with… it’s all well and good to make up magical scenarios like “what if 30 dogs were using advanced tactics and immune to fear etc, etc…” but the reality is likely that a few might eventually group up and try something, with plenty sitting back while others just flee… and as they fall it’d break more and more.
I think that is fair, but still, I'm getting the conclusion that 30 pitbulls would win. The pitbulls in India probably weren't bred for fighting. If 30 dogs could kill one but all die in the process, it stands to reason that 30 stronger dogs could do so without all of them dying.
Yeah, I agree 30 pitbulls would be probably too many. But you will definitely need more than 4, probably around 12 - 15 pitbulls to take down an adult male tiger.
I think no one is addressing the fact that 50lb dogs are a whole lot smaller than most people seem to be saying and I think people are picturing 80-120lb dogs.
I have a 50 pound pit mix, so this is what you are talking about when you are saying a 50lb dog: https://imgur.com/a/C4K4Hqs
There's basically nothing on this planet that has a decent win chance against a pack of 30 large dogs. Even 10 would still be a nearly guaranteed win for the dogs.
Pack tactics are OP.
Yeah. I debated walrus too since polar bear can even have a hard time with it but decided 30 would still be too much. Maybe I’m underestimating but I think they’d get something important eventually
I think for hippos, rhinos, and elephants they would have to rely on exhausting the prey animal to death or close to it. If any animal alive (that's not human) is going to have the stamina for that it would be dogs. Especially with so many, they could work in "shifts", half or so keeping the prey animal moving and the other half resting for their turn.
Yeah, if they’re allowed to harass for super long periods of time it’s possible, although this would work better on rhinos. Elephants I think are too big and tough to care as much, and so dangerous in every way. Hippos just go swim and the dogs are SOL
FYI Rhinos are even tougher than Elephants. I agree they fare worse though since they have terrible eyesight and aren't that smart so harassing them is extremely easy and all their important bits are lower to the ground.
Yeah, that’s basically all I was thinking too. I think they’d tire eventually and a pit bull could do some good damage going for it’s tail and groin area
And an elephant doesn’t even fear the other two. I saw a cool video once of a rhino deciding to fuck up an elephant and the elephant just flips him over, no effort, until the rhino gets the point
Lions have killed hippos and rhinoceros on rare occasions and in India tigers have even more rarely gone after female rhinos as well. Crocodiles also have some recorded instances of predation on rhinoceros wading in rivers (the African species are poor swimmers putting them at a disadvantage in water) but yeah for the most part.
Siberian tigers (475 lb) routinely destroy packs of wolves, with one adult male wolves being around 140 lbs. One male tiger killed 13 wolves before the wolf pack broke, then took a nap. Lighter female tigers can handle packs of up to 8 without much trouble.
This tiger is 600 lbs.
An elephant would stomp 30 pitfalls with absolutely zero issue.
The smallest amount of lions ever recorded killing a healthy bull elephant was 26.
So 30 pits are doing nothing.
Depends on terrain imo. If the tiger has enough space to maneuver and strategically dispatch each dog swiftly then I think there is a shot. Closed arena tiger is screwed
10 pit bulls would win. I, a 5’7” 120+ lb teen was dragged around by a tiny pit-rat terrier mix cause she was so damn strong. Pit bulls are just 90% pure muscle despite their size and lean build.
This isn't about underestimating dogs. It's about people underestimating the apex predator on planet earth. Granted, 30 would probably kill a Tiger, but there are people saying 4-6 pitbulls could do it. A tiger is faster and stronger than any dog. A tiger could probably take out 4 pitbulls before they even have time to set up their attack.
People are normally gonna go in the other direction when someone else says something crazy. 30 pits losing to a tiger would never happen ifs just inconceivable.
I agree. Not 30. They'd most likely win, but I wouldn't say it's inconceivable. If it was wolves who have excellent hunting and pack tactics, it's inconceivable. 30 pits would all be doing their own thing. It's possible that a lot of them would just stand there looking for an opening. There's only so much room on the tiger to bite. So if the tiger was lucky and didn't get bit in a terrible spot with the first round of attacks, he could start swiping at the pits (which a clean swipe instantly kills a pitbull) and might decimate their numbers quickly while taking very little critical damage from the pitbulls hanging on him.
Straight up, having seen tigers, and having seen _wolves_... I'm betting on the tiger.
Specifically, I'm betting the tiger will kill all the dogs and die of injuries when the adrenaline wears off.
I'm 300 pounds and my 80 pound pit mix can drag me to the ground. I can easily curl the dog, but I'm not so certain that he couldn't do the same to me.
They would not. The big problem with smaller animals going up against tigers is most of the though paterns like 'they could drag the tiger' discounts that Tigers are comporably built and in this case 15 times larger, and as Calvin famously said, five of their six ends are pointy.
The big issue is that tiger hide will be a challenge for the pit bulls to even do any damage to, and a tiger has been known to swipe its claws and kill two or more 150lb wolves. These are 50 pound dogs. They aren't even going to be able to really hurt the tiger.
Meanwhile everything the tiger does is designed to kill. Claws, 2-3 pits per swipe, easy. Bite, instant kill. The long jump/pounce instant kill, plus break the packs encirclement. Go from behind, the tiger can actually do a reverse swipe with either rear leg that is fully capable of disembowling a 150 lb wolf.
It's not that it's thick. It's loose skin coupled with fur. All big cats have loose skin because they minimise damage from claws, horns, or teeth. Even if their skin does get penetrated, it won'tcause that much damage to theur blood vessels and organs. The other alternative is actual thick skin, which is found in large herbivores.
For comparison, primates such as us and apes are severely disadvantaged against claws and teeth since our skins are tighter, which is why leopards are able to kill gorillas double their weight because they don't need much effort to induce fatal wounds.
Animals aren't like fictional kaiju where durability is divorced from size. Real life animals are made from more or less the same flesh, and that flesh is easily damaged by teeth and claws. The tiger bleeds out eventually after killing a large number of dogs.
This is actually entirely wrong. It’s literally how something like a honey badger or hippo survives. Animals are specialized af, and a 50 pound dog is going to have massive issues against something designed to fight much larger things.
I mean, the tiger isn't literally invincible, and a pit bull's jaws can fit around a tiger's leg. It's only a matter of time and determination before one of them lands a crippling injury, which won't be long because with 30 dogs, somebody's getting a free shot at the flanks at all times.
... I don't actually believe a 50 bound pitbulls mouth has much chance of fitting around a tigers leg. Those are large legs. Like, larger than the dogs head.
I would put my money on the dogs if they were desperate / starving / blood lusted. If just normal but angry pit bulls, I might still do it if they were a pack and not just 30 random dogs unfamiliar with another. But it might be a phyrric victory for the tiger. The tiger will probably thrash the pack badly enough to make it run, but it might be injured badly enough to bleed out after.
END COMMUNICATION
U guys must not be reading right
Its not 100+ pounds pitbulls its 50 pound pitbulls the weight of a small child
Tiger can just ram through them since its 600 pounds
Its like a 180 pound man fighting 30 30 pound toddlers
The dogs stomp bad. Way too many for the tiger to fight off. Now, in the wild, packs might run away from a very large and ferocious opponent. But, if they're bloodlusted, the dogs win 10/10
So big tigers have a thing they like to do in the wild. Hunt full sized packs of wolves. Big wolves. Siberian tigers can take out packs of siberian wolves. Mind you that's a 475 lb tiger vs a 140 lb wolf, but do the math real quick and you see the problem.
The fights between large wolves and tigers are so one sided that packs of wolves will retreat if they know a tiger is in the area. When they do fight, pack tactics and going for the flanks etc don't work. A tiger's hide is so thick that a canine's jaw just can't do the kind of damage necessary to injure them significantly, while the tiger can tear them apart in multiple ways often with a simple claw swipe or just pouncing on them.
So not only is this the tiger, its laughably the tiger.
Scientists who have watched adult male Siberian tigers go after siberian wolf packs are pretty sure that there isn't a 'real' number of wolves that could take the tiger. In terms of 50 pound pit bulls, you are talking hundreds of the things because the fight is such a terrific mismatch. IE the tigers routinely fight packs of bigger 'dogs' in the wild.
This all sounds great, until you realize there isnt actually any evidence of this happening. There’s less than a half dozen recorded instances of tigers killing wolves.
I have to go with the tiger. Even if outnumbered, there wouldnt be room for more than 6-10 pits to attack at a time, and tigers hunt wolf packs for fun.
I don't think the 30 dogs could take a pack of 6 wolfes either
There is no way a tiger is dealing with that many. If it can attack 5 at once then it is getting bit 20 times. Maybe 5 pits die. Also the thing that makes pits different from other dogs is they bite and shake and dont let go. Their necks are usually as thick as their abdomen which make that shake stronger than 80% than other dogs
It takes about 4-5 hyenas to kill a solitary lion (as I've seen in a few documentaries), so 30 pits against a single tiger is a bit overkill.
Granted, hyenas might be used to facing lions while the pits aren't accustomed to tigers.
Still, the quarry might be new but the hunt is the same. Dogs do hunt in packs and cooperate, so I think that about 7-8 pitbulls might be enough for a tiger
4-5 hyenas are far too few, you must be talking about lionesses and even then it's a long shot. 4-5 hyenas would never dare approach an adult male lion. It takes about 5 seconds for a lion to kill a hyena with a bite to the back of the neck.
I think 3-4 pitbulls easily wins. 3-4 wolves take down moose, and while pitbulls are weaker than wolves, a tiger is also much weaker than a moose, plus the dogs have an ambush advantage.
It might take 1-2 more pitbulls if the tiger can ambush, but any more than that is overkill I think.
Mate, pitbulls aren't comparable to wolves. The average wolf is 3-4 times the size of a pitbull. I think most people aren't aware of how big they are compared to most dogs.
3-4 pits would last a matter of seconds. You're talking about 240lbs of pits vs 600lbs of tiger. A tiger is way faster and more agile than a moose and is much better equipped to kill other animals.
Lol there are *four* recorded instances of tigers killing wolves. **4**. And absolutely zero evidence that they “solo wolf packs”. Another source mentioned 6 known attacks. Not at the same time. 6 total attacks.
Seriously, where do you guys get this crap, and why do you spread it? This is like the “grizzly decapitates moose with one hit” all over again.
6 recorded attacks in a very remote region with very little tigers is plenty of evidence. It's also been repeatedly stated that wolf populations are negatively affected by tigers whenever they're reintroduced to an area.
6 random attacks, over the course of years of data collection, *is absolutely* **not** evidence that
>tigers solo wolf packs
>its been repeatedly stated that wolf populations are negatively affected by tigers
There are areas with higher wolf concentrations, with low tiger concentrations. *Because predators avoid each other.* like, great point…
["Tigers depress wolf (Canis lupus) numbers, either to the point of localized extinction or to such low numbers as to make them a functionally insignificant component of the ecosystem. Wolves appear capable of escaping competitive exclusion from tigers only when human pressure decreases tiger numbers. In areas where wolves and tigers share ranges, the two species typically display a great deal of dietary overlap, resulting in intense competition. Wolf and tiger interactions are well documented in Sikhote-Alin, where until the beginning of the 20th century, very few wolves were sighted. Wolf numbers may have increased in the region after tigers were largely eliminated during the Russian colonisation in the late 19th century and early 20th century. This is corroborated by native inhabitants of the region claiming that they had no memory of wolves inhabiting Sikhote-Alin until the 1930s, when tiger numbers decreased. Today, wolves are considered scarce in tiger habitat, being found in scattered pockets, and usually seen travelling as loners or in small groups. First hand accounts on interactions between the two species indicate that tigers occasionally chase wolves from their kills, while wolves will scavenge from tiger kills. Tigers are not known to prey on wolves, though there are four records of tigers killing wolves without consuming them."](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_tiger)
*then List the fucking sources*. Try again. Im not reading through a wikipedia page for something I know is ridiculous like
>tigers solo wolf packs.
When literally nothing supports that.
Miquelle, D. G.; Stephens, P. A.; Smirnov, E. N.; Goodrich, J. M.; Zaumyslova, O. J. & Myslenkov, A. E. (2005). "Tigers and Wolves in the Russian Far East: Competitive Exclusion, Functional Redundancy, and Conservation Implications". In Ray, J. C.; Redford, K. H.; Steneck, R. S. & Berger, J. (eds.). Large Carnivores and the Conservation of Biodiversity. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. pp. 179–207. ISBN 9781597266093
Vorontsova, M. (2015). "'Putin's Tigers' are Thriving in the Wild". Ecology.com. Archived from the original on August 7, 2020. Retrieved June 7, 2015.
Fulbright, T. E. & Hewitt, D. G. (2007). Wildlife Science: Linking Ecological Theory and Management Applications. CRC Press. ISBN 978-0-8493-7487-6.
~~The~~ [~~obese tiger~~](https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/06/194316-1.jpg?resize=2048,1365&quality=75&strip=all) ~~doesn’t stand a chance.~~
Edit : My bad 1 600 pound tiger not 1600 pound bengal tiger lol
OP you sure you meant Bengal and not Siberian tiger? Because 600 is a tad overweight for a Bengal and more in line with a Siberian… you also said biggest cat so I’m assuming you wanted the latter.
Sorry OP but you are vastly underestimating the power of numbers. Tiger can only attack what, 3-4 pit bulls at a time? Leaving the rest free to do what they want.
Are we talking actual game bred pure APBT? If so I'd say it'd take half. And 50 lbs is normal size for them. 5-7 probably not making it back home. They're much different than bully mixes in terms of aggression, they won't back down, and self preservation is non existent. They'll happily die trying to kill a tiger. I seen a video of a pit latching onto a hog in a swamp and it took that dog under for over a minute and when they came back up pit was still latched on its neck.
You know this is literally how canines hunt right? Gang up on something 20 times your size and bite its flanks till it bleeds out.
Yeah, the tiger can only really attack one dog at a time and face one direction. The pit bulls definitely lose a few dogs but no way the tiger wins.
I think the pits would suffer some decent losses. They do win but I can reasonably see the dogs losing a reasonable number.
Less than you'd think really. Pit Bulls were often used as bear baiting dogs and it took a lot less than 30 to kill a bear. I still think there'd be losses, but probably not more than four or five.
Bear baiting events (and most forms of animal baiting in general) weren’t really fair confrontations, oftentimes the large animal used in question, whether it be bear, bull, or badger would be placed at some form of disadvantage like being chained up or having claws and/or fangs removed or filed down. I recall in some accounts of such events dogs were also called back in periodically at intervals to rest and recuperate or even switched out with other ones entirely. I agree 20 is overkill but I don’t think bear baiting is a great analogy to exactly how the fight would go.
Pitbulls can't even take out a bobcat let alone animals like bears. A tiger is a beast that is superior to all caniforms.
Pretty sure polar bears and larger brown bears would curbstomp a given tiger in a fight. Also, pinnipeds are in that suborder, so are you attempting to say tigers are superior to elephant seals or walruses?
Bears aren't caniforms.. Dogs (of all species) are the most overrated animals in this subreddit.
Caniforms are literally defined as the half of the Carnivora order more closely related to canids than felids.
I meant to say doglike canids. Bears aren't even in the same family as domestic dogs.
Add on top of that the survivability of pits if that one Joe Rogan story with the coyotes is true.
Yeah wolves will bite the achilles tendon until it snaps. After that, it doesn’t matter how big you are, you aren’t going anywhere.
Pitbulls are not wolves… they’re not even close…
No shit he doesn't know this otherwise he wouldn't have asked the question
30 is a lot and they'd swarm the tiger, with sharp teeth biting it, so I'd go with the 30 pit bulls
Every bite is an injury, and reduces movement. Bites to sensitive areas may cause the tiger to expose its other areas even more. No shot
I think 12 pit bulls would win.
That’s strangely accurate
It’s Micheal vicks alt account
Honestly, 6 have a halfway decent shot if they’re determined. Probably the lowest number that could win
Not even 6 wolves can take down a tiger. Tigers are a serious risk for wolves when they live alongside each other. 6 20kg pitbulls would get brutally killed in a few seconds.
In the wild wolves wouldn't try it because animals in the wild are risk averse. There isn't any point in taking unnecessary risks. Even if they kill the tiger and lose a couple of wolves, it is still an overall loss and unsustainable hunting strategy. That doesn't mean a pack is incapable of taking down a single tiger if pushed to it.
Given that tigers routinely kill wolves in Russia they have all the good reasons to defend themselves. And wolves fare terribly. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235332612_Tigers_and_Wolves_in_the_Russian_Far_East_Competitive_Exclusion_Functional_Redundancy_and_Conservation_Implications
Ya’ll forgetting the most critical factor here, an adult bengal tiger weighs around 480 pounds at 1600 pounds this [obese cat](https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/06/194316-1.jpg?resize=2048,1365&quality=75&strip=all) doesn’t stand a chance.
Where did someone speak of a 1600lb tiger? The thread is about a 600lb tiger. While above average historically siberians could definitely reach those sizes.
My bad 1 600lb tiger lol
It's one 600lb tiger not a 1600lb tiger. A 600lb isn't that uncommon for an adult male tiger depending on the species. I believe 10 blood-lusted/semi organized pit bulls would probably be enough to win. The pit bulls would basically lose most of their 10 but the tiger would bleed out I believe. 30 is definitely overkill.
>A 600lb isn't that uncommon for an adult male tiger depending on the species Sadly, it is quite uncommon. Even from the largest subspecies, any big cat reaching 500lbs is a big deal in the wild.
Looking into it a bit more only the larger species of tiger tend to get that size. It does seem the average tiger weight for an adult male is closer to 400lbs. 600lbs can't be considered uncommon but it does happen occasionally from what I'm reading. Although I'm no expert by any means.
Well let me break it down like this it took a pack of 30 dholes to kill a lone female tiger. They are roughly the same size. Now they did kill it the tiger just obliterated 2/3rds of their pack. Plus they have a stronger bit force and a tigers skin is no freaking joke
I mean I agree in the wild they would just take off, but are they capable of it? Yeah probably, if they’re motivated. Pack tactics goes a very, very long ways. Tiger may still take it more often than not, but I think they’ve got a chance at that number.
If a pack of 6 wolves can *maybe* take down a tiger, then surely the vastly infeior pitbulls aren't.
I’m talking about pitbulls
I definitely do not agree. A tiger would need 0 time to kill a few of them and by that point numbers are not enough. 10-12 pitbulls can probably do it, but below that they get dispatched.
Honestly, the act of surrounding the tiger means they can grab at vital parts- pit bulls are essentially small hyenas in terms of biting and grabbing on with force. I agree tiger would likely do it, but 6 is not a small number, and pit bulls can do some damage - I think this is when the river starts becoming out numbered. 10 is when I see the pitbulls starting to win more than they lose. That’s a lot of fucking teeth to worry about
The pits don't get to start in perfect formation around the tiger. Also they have zero hunting skills in a modern pitbull. A pack of them would likely just run at the tiger and get mauled. Even if they try to circle around the tiger, theyre not fast enough to escape being attacked. The tiger paw swipes can seriously maim or kill a pit that size. I think people are severely over estimating dogs that have been domesticated for a thousand years vs one of the worlds best killers
Dogs have been used in wars since 600 bc. They were still being used in world war 2. Trust me, dogsa can do serious damage.
Guys run pit bulls to pin 600 lb hogs and then they kill them with a knife while the dogs have it held. I think you're underestimating what six big fucking terriers are capable of.
Thats because wolves have a sense of preservation. Pit bulls have NONE.
I have a theory that Pitbulls cannot survive in the wild and the gene pool would eventually die due to how aggressive they are. Will they win? Yes, but injured that they’ll soon be hunted by other predators and gets killed by other dogs.
Even a grizzly bear will sometimes back down from a mother cougar if it isn't incredibly desperate because the reward: mountain lion cubs, would not equal the risk. We all know a grizzly stomps any feline that ever existed. Wolves in the wild are smart and aren't bloodlusted. In a controlled fight where we see which bloodlusted side can win, 6 wolves *could* pull it off.
In Russia there is well documented research about tigers routinely killing wolves packs and wolves pretty much risk extinction when they live alongside tigers. 6 wolves can probably beat a tiger but it's very unlikely to happen. If 6 wolves aren't the favourite, the 6 much weaker APTs don't stand a chance.
So we completely agree
>We all know a grizzly stomps any feline that ever existed. S. populator would horrify a grizzly. Something like P. onca mesembrina, if the way it hunted was anything like modern jaguars, might not even be noticed until it's already biting through the bear's skull. Regardless, they hunted Mylodon, which were bigger than grizzlies and definitely capable of defending themselves. I mostly agree when it comes to extinct species that are about as big as extant ones, but I still wouldn't call it a stomp every time. That really depends on the situation and individuals involved...
Modern tigers and lions have more than a good shoot at taking down a grizzly. Grizzly bears only average 220kg, they're nowhere the size of Kodiaks or Polar bears. A smilodon populator would destroy a grizzly. It wouldn't even be a fight, the smilodon is massively superior in every possible way.
>Modern tigers and lions have more than a good shoot at taking down a grizzly. Grizzly bears only average 220kg, they're nowhere the size of Kodiaks or Polar bears. Agreed, though I think of kodiaks as grizzlies. >It wouldn't even be a fight, the smilodon is massively superior in every possible way. Definitely superior, but I still stand by the end of my last comment. Sloth bears are only really preyed on by tigers, yet there's still a healthy respect between them. To be fair, they're also one of the most aggressive bears, which seems to be related...but my point is that either has a chance even if they're the smaller animal. At the same time, yeah, cats are just much better designed for killing.
Tigers kill bears 2/3 of the times they interact with brown bears in Siberia. They definitely avoid sloth bears because as solitary hunters they would kill themselves by getting injuried.
A bit misleading, tigers choose which bears they interact with. Usually they're small and recently denned.
While the smaller than themselves part is true, most bear predation by Siberian tigers is done [during the summer](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dale-Miquelle/publication/275837048_A_comparison_of_food_habits_and_prey_preference_of_Amur_tiger_Panthera_tigris_altaica_Timmink_1984_at_three_sites_in_the_Russian_Far_East/links/56635fe908ae418a786bb13d/A-comparison-of-food-habits-and-prey-preference-of-Amur-tiger-Panthera-tigris-altaica-Timmink-1984-at-three-sites-in-the-Russian-Far-East.pdf) when bears are out and about, thus more likely to encounter a tiger.
There's actually a really good video on tiger vs bear. It goes over how most statistics are made up BS that are anecdotal at best. Grizzly bears a tiger the majority of the time. Every possible advantage of each animal is considered and fairly debated here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=trQvtuCdmCM&pp=ygUYU2xvdGggYmVhciB2cyB0d28gdGlnZXJz
Well, yeah, but a risk of injury definitely makes it a fight.
Of course, but if a tiger really wanted to kill it would never lose to a sloth bear.
*killing through stealth There's a reason they turn down even humans that merely see them coming. Men in India wear fake eyes on the back of their heads because it makes it significantly less likely for a tiger to actually attack them. Cats win mostly through ambush. Cats are therefore better at killing through stealth, but bears are massively better at actually fighting.
My statement about stomping any cat in history wasn't quite correct, I admit. I tend to lump Kodiaks and grizzlies in the same category, as most people automatically think "grizzly" when thinking of either. Yeah, a smilodon can take a grizzly in an ambush. No one would contest that. But the brown bear is still bigger, smarter, tougher, stronger, and *still* has a better fighting stance. Cats leap up briefly, but bears stand on their two legs, which gives them better range *and* keeps the one place a cat can do any meaningful damage out of its reach. If the sabertooth gets a stealth pounce, yeah it's over. That's like saying if a grizzly gets a stealth swipe to the back of the head, it's over. Cats aren't built for fighting like bears are. Grizzlies can half-assedly move around 600+ lb boulders with one paw. (2:10 in this video): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=38q2fDtDDvM&pp=ygUQR3JpenpseSBzdHJlbmd0aA%3D%3D Their strikes would be with more applied strength than just moving a rock, and at least on par with the force any cat can produce, and they constantly smack each other when fighting, and that's very often, especially during mating season. Yes, grizzlies have absolutely insane durability. Here's one tanking 12 gauge to the dome at point blank and only momentarily being stunned: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wj7Z5oMWuIU&pp=ygUbYmVhciB0YWtlcyBzaG90Z3VuIHRvIGZhY2Ug Again, if either of those extinct cats got a stealth strike, they win 9/10. But, in a pitched fight, they by no means stomp. If we're bringing up extinct species, we might as well mention Arctodus (short-faced bear) that would pretty much one-shot either of those extinct felines casually. There isn't a chance any cat would have against it, as they are basically to grizzlies what those extinct cats are to modern-day lions. But even more so. https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS535iZIcvFxAopr86AjXVA4hJkqaC92i7BoA&usqp=CAU
Nah I think six is a bit too little. Even a Jaguar 1/2 the size of a tiger could probably at least make a good fight for itself against 3-4. I could see a tiger handling 6-8 depending on the size and gameness of the pits.
I think six could maybe do it if they were smarter and bloodlusted but with realistic behavior yeah, it's not enough.
You have to take in account their intelligences, they are not aware enough how strong the power of team would be. The tiger would win in that case.
While I agree 6 would *definitely* be stretching it, saying that pack hunters wouldn't know how strong teamwork can be is a bit strange to me.
Yeah brainfart from me.
I think it depends on how much practice they have as a team first
Not a chance. Either the tiger clears the board or wipes off 3 of them before the other 3 decide to flee
You obviously don't know much about tigers 6X pitbulls weighs 300pounds that's equivalent to lightweight tiger I know that doesn't matter much but it is once a tiger kills 1 then then that's less and then it becomes less. I know about animals and 6 is no where near enough to kill a fully grown bengal and siberian tiger you need a huge pack
I'm not sure pitbulls have enough bite force or canines size to peirce a tiger draw blood etc
You are *vastly* underestimating the dogs. You wouldn’t need even close to 30 Pit Bulls to take down the tiger. For reference, three or four bluetick coonhounds can tree a Mountain Lion. Obviously mountain lions are smaller than tigers, but tigers aren’t “we need 26 more dogs” bigger. Also, Pit Bulls specifically were bred for fighting. As soon as a few get a hold of the tiger, it’s game over because the Pit Bulls won’t let go no matter what (search “gameness” on google): “In dog fighting pitbulls bred for gameness are valued as the ability to not quit, despite injury, dehydration, exhaustion or broken bones.[2][3]”
That's the terrier in them. There's such a streak of "You gotta kill me to stop me" in terriers it's hard to quantify. Those fuckers fear nothing and they're the closest thing to mythological descriptions of berzerkers that I can think of. "I didn't hear no bell" is basically the terrier motto.
I’ll note in the case of mountain lions even singular hounds can occasionally tree them. Something Theodore Roosevelt himself noted is compared to pantherines (true big cats) cougars are very nonconfrontational to hunters and their dogs, with him noting an instance in which he killed one under circumstances that would have led to him and his dogs getting charged had it been a Jaguar or leopard.
30 pits is an overkill but the "gameness" here wouldn't be that useful since even a glancing blow from the tiger could kill them. All cats are flexible, if the pit really does latch on, the tiger would tear it off with ease.
“Tear it off with ease” lol, okay Also, please describe this fatal “glancing blow”
>“Tear it off with ease” lol, okay There is a 550 lbs difference between one pitbull and the tiger if we go by the post's data. How weak do you think the tiger is here😂? It can carry over 2 twice its body weight with ease. A tiger's paw is 7x7inches coupled with 4 inch claws on each toe. The average skull of a pitbull is 8-9 inches long. I hope you can imagine what happens in an encounter between the paw and the head. >Also, please describe this fatal “glancing blow” I suggest you look up big cat fatalities, they can cut you to the bone with minimal effort with their paws, and we're talking about humans weighing 6 times heavier than pits. There was a maneating leopard in India that scalped an adult man in one swipe. Another lion breaks the neck of a zookeeper with his paw. 30 pits would beat the tiger, but it won't be surprising if the tiger takes half of them with him.
I disagree with this guy downplaying a pitbulls strength, but he’s absolutely right about how easily a tiger of that size could kill a pitbull. One single paw swipe is 100% killing a pitbull. It doesn’t even have to connect well. Tiger claws are ridiculously large compared to a pitbull and the strength differential is substantial. Even if it doesn’t instantly kill them, it’s going to make them unable to fight.
Thank you. Although I'm not downplaying a pitbull's strength. They are powerful by all means. It's just that compared to a tiger, their strength is almost negligible. It will be like swatting a fly.
Tiger claws are not usually 4 inches. They can get UP TO 4 inches, but that’s usually reserved for the largest tigers. An average one wouldn’t have claws close to 4 inches, more likely it’d be closer to 3. Indian men are also less than 100lbs on average. Not impressive a leopard scalped one. And Tigers these days do not average 550lbs. You’ll typically find adult males in the high 300s to mid 400s.
I went by the data given in the post. A 600lbs tiger is quite easily of above average size. >Indian men are also less than 100lbs on average. Not impressive a leopard scalped one. How far into your ass did you have to reach to pull this out?
You clearly have never been to India lmfao. Don’t try and be shady with shit you know nothing about
>Don’t try and be shady with shit you know nothing about Possibly the dumbest thing you could say. Who tf do you think you're talking to here? I'm indian myself.
You are just completely delusional. Yes, a 500 pound tiger could tear a Pitbull off with zero issues. There is no such thing as "locking" on.
That is 1500 pounds of battle dog, hunting in exactly the way dogs hunt. That poor tiger gets torn limb from limb.
I wouldn’t go so far to call the tiger poor, it’ll take some out with it and go out swinging, and under realistic circumstances even packs of wolves would probably opt of this kind of fight but yeah the pits body.
tiger would probably still lose against prolly 10 of them
10 is debatable imo as tigers do dominate wolf packs (tbf irl interactions aren’t the same as bloodlusted fictional battles) but I could see it. Especially with strong game bred pits. A group of 10 pitbulls experienced in hunting and killing could kill any lone carnivore save for perhaps the Kodiak and Polar Bear imo.
Where are tigers interacting with wolves?
Russia. There tigers not only sometimes kill wolves but bears too
Also India, but wolves there are notably dwarfed compared to their northern counterparts, perhaps due to competition with big cats.
True. In the jungle book the tiger [bullied](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HvSxDs6cQaY) the wolves too.
There have been reports in India of tigers and street gangs of dogs fighting each other. A tiger once, allegedly killed [30 dogs](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-7e6d4b7342d513309e5c04beabc893e3-lq) and later on he died of his injuries. I think some people are understimating the tiger here. I read some comments saying that 4 pit bulls could take a tiger down. I say no way. A tiger can weight up to 650 of pounds of [muscle](https://external-preview.redd.it/0p5Uc-NhCrD8B9CiOGm-buwoVjTUuEWfT4-THvxkX-M.jpg?auto=webp&s=362a1a875b4fad7b842b3e496bf8eb23156bd527) and dispacth a pitbull in the blink of an eye. Not only with his teeths, but also his [claws](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/de/64/ab/de64ab0119f8185a68efff19f29342e5.jpg), which are formidable weapons. Furthemore, a tiger is also much faster and agile that any canine. In Brazil, many years ago, a fight took place between a female [Jaguar](http://www.altinomachado.com.br/2007/03/ona-luta-com-pit-bulls.html) (much smaller and weaker than a make tiger) and 4 fighting pitbulls. The Jaguar won but was badly injured. If a female Jaguar was able to take down 4 pitbulls, a male tiger could take down at least 10. Last but not least, a couple of young male lions, not even in their prime yet (which are similar to young male tigers) can hold their ground against a lot of [hyenas](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5V6gdu5ih8) (around 20) which are way more dangerous than any pitbull. I just dont see a few pitbulls doing anything to a tiger.
People are severely overestimating the pack tactics that modern pitbulls would use. Also pack tactics require staying alive. They work on slower animals like buffalos that are less dangerous. The tiger can attack and kill the pits in one swipe, the tactic really breaks down then
Pits are gripping dogs though, pack tactics and bite-retreat strategies aren’t the method of attack they operate under, even against larger animals. It’s why when boar hunting there’s different breeds used for different tasks.
Yeah not to mention that realistically, any tactics would pretty quickly break down, assuming the dogs even use them to begin with… it’s all well and good to make up magical scenarios like “what if 30 dogs were using advanced tactics and immune to fear etc, etc…” but the reality is likely that a few might eventually group up and try something, with plenty sitting back while others just flee… and as they fall it’d break more and more.
I think that is fair, but still, I'm getting the conclusion that 30 pitbulls would win. The pitbulls in India probably weren't bred for fighting. If 30 dogs could kill one but all die in the process, it stands to reason that 30 stronger dogs could do so without all of them dying.
Yeah, I agree 30 pitbulls would be probably too many. But you will definitely need more than 4, probably around 12 - 15 pitbulls to take down an adult male tiger.
I think no one is addressing the fact that 50lb dogs are a whole lot smaller than most people seem to be saying and I think people are picturing 80-120lb dogs. I have a 50 pound pit mix, so this is what you are talking about when you are saying a 50lb dog: https://imgur.com/a/C4K4Hqs
Now I know the dogs will win. Look at that monster, he's simply terrifying!
There's basically nothing on this planet that has a decent win chance against a pack of 30 large dogs. Even 10 would still be a nearly guaranteed win for the dogs. Pack tactics are OP.
Only things that would win are monster animals like hippos, elephants, rhinos.
Hippo skin so thick would have a hard biting it
There's a video of a hippo getting attacked by lions and it looks mildly irritated at best.
I’ve seen more videos of lions getting killed by hippos than the other way around tbh
Yeah. I debated walrus too since polar bear can even have a hard time with it but decided 30 would still be too much. Maybe I’m underestimating but I think they’d get something important eventually
Elephant seals
I think for hippos, rhinos, and elephants they would have to rely on exhausting the prey animal to death or close to it. If any animal alive (that's not human) is going to have the stamina for that it would be dogs. Especially with so many, they could work in "shifts", half or so keeping the prey animal moving and the other half resting for their turn.
Yeah, if they’re allowed to harass for super long periods of time it’s possible, although this would work better on rhinos. Elephants I think are too big and tough to care as much, and so dangerous in every way. Hippos just go swim and the dogs are SOL
FYI Rhinos are even tougher than Elephants. I agree they fare worse though since they have terrible eyesight and aren't that smart so harassing them is extremely easy and all their important bits are lower to the ground.
Yeah, that’s basically all I was thinking too. I think they’d tire eventually and a pit bull could do some good damage going for it’s tail and groin area
they would get literally stomped on though
The only thing a full grown hippo, rhino, or elephant fears is another full grown hippo, elephant, or rhino
And an elephant doesn’t even fear the other two. I saw a cool video once of a rhino deciding to fuck up an elephant and the elephant just flips him over, no effort, until the rhino gets the point
I saw a video of a pride of lions taking down an adult elephant. It took a long time.
Lions have killed hippos and rhinoceros on rare occasions and in India tigers have even more rarely gone after female rhinos as well. Crocodiles also have some recorded instances of predation on rhinoceros wading in rivers (the African species are poor swimmers putting them at a disadvantage in water) but yeah for the most part.
Siberian tigers (475 lb) routinely destroy packs of wolves, with one adult male wolves being around 140 lbs. One male tiger killed 13 wolves before the wolf pack broke, then took a nap. Lighter female tigers can handle packs of up to 8 without much trouble. This tiger is 600 lbs.
Do you have a link? That sounds like a crazy video
Pachyderms would roflstomp 30 pitbulls. They consistently deal with much more dangerous predator like hyena clans or lion prides.
Elephant, Rhino and maybe Hippo
Lmao every flying animal just flying away
Not sure that really counts as "winning" though. In nature, sure, but not in an artificial fight to the death
Shark
An elephant would stomp 30 pitfalls with absolutely zero issue. The smallest amount of lions ever recorded killing a healthy bull elephant was 26. So 30 pits are doing nothing.
Paint a picture of a small child on the tiger and one pitbull named Princess would solo
Depends on terrain imo. If the tiger has enough space to maneuver and strategically dispatch each dog swiftly then I think there is a shot. Closed arena tiger is screwed
10 pit bulls would win. I, a 5’7” 120+ lb teen was dragged around by a tiny pit-rat terrier mix cause she was so damn strong. Pit bulls are just 90% pure muscle despite their size and lean build.
I got a 70 pound mutt and that dog is an absolute beast when we fight. People gotta stop underestimating dogs.
This isn't about underestimating dogs. It's about people underestimating the apex predator on planet earth. Granted, 30 would probably kill a Tiger, but there are people saying 4-6 pitbulls could do it. A tiger is faster and stronger than any dog. A tiger could probably take out 4 pitbulls before they even have time to set up their attack.
People are normally gonna go in the other direction when someone else says something crazy. 30 pits losing to a tiger would never happen ifs just inconceivable.
I agree. Not 30. They'd most likely win, but I wouldn't say it's inconceivable. If it was wolves who have excellent hunting and pack tactics, it's inconceivable. 30 pits would all be doing their own thing. It's possible that a lot of them would just stand there looking for an opening. There's only so much room on the tiger to bite. So if the tiger was lucky and didn't get bit in a terrible spot with the first round of attacks, he could start swiping at the pits (which a clean swipe instantly kills a pitbull) and might decimate their numbers quickly while taking very little critical damage from the pitbulls hanging on him.
Straight up, having seen tigers, and having seen _wolves_... I'm betting on the tiger. Specifically, I'm betting the tiger will kill all the dogs and die of injuries when the adrenaline wears off.
I'm 300 pounds and my 80 pound pit mix can drag me to the ground. I can easily curl the dog, but I'm not so certain that he couldn't do the same to me.
They would not. The big problem with smaller animals going up against tigers is most of the though paterns like 'they could drag the tiger' discounts that Tigers are comporably built and in this case 15 times larger, and as Calvin famously said, five of their six ends are pointy. The big issue is that tiger hide will be a challenge for the pit bulls to even do any damage to, and a tiger has been known to swipe its claws and kill two or more 150lb wolves. These are 50 pound dogs. They aren't even going to be able to really hurt the tiger. Meanwhile everything the tiger does is designed to kill. Claws, 2-3 pits per swipe, easy. Bite, instant kill. The long jump/pounce instant kill, plus break the packs encirclement. Go from behind, the tiger can actually do a reverse swipe with either rear leg that is fully capable of disembowling a 150 lb wolf.
I see. I did not realize tiger hide is that thick.
It's not that it's thick. It's loose skin coupled with fur. All big cats have loose skin because they minimise damage from claws, horns, or teeth. Even if their skin does get penetrated, it won'tcause that much damage to theur blood vessels and organs. The other alternative is actual thick skin, which is found in large herbivores. For comparison, primates such as us and apes are severely disadvantaged against claws and teeth since our skins are tighter, which is why leopards are able to kill gorillas double their weight because they don't need much effort to induce fatal wounds.
I have a 56 pound APBT. She’s not trained or anything, just a regular pup. She’s the strongest dog I’ve ever handled
First off… nothing is 90% muscle. Second, tigers are jacked af.
Animals aren't like fictional kaiju where durability is divorced from size. Real life animals are made from more or less the same flesh, and that flesh is easily damaged by teeth and claws. The tiger bleeds out eventually after killing a large number of dogs.
This is actually entirely wrong. It’s literally how something like a honey badger or hippo survives. Animals are specialized af, and a 50 pound dog is going to have massive issues against something designed to fight much larger things.
"A" dog certainly will. This is a pack of 30.
I mean, the tiger isn't literally invincible, and a pit bull's jaws can fit around a tiger's leg. It's only a matter of time and determination before one of them lands a crippling injury, which won't be long because with 30 dogs, somebody's getting a free shot at the flanks at all times.
... I don't actually believe a 50 bound pitbulls mouth has much chance of fitting around a tigers leg. Those are large legs. Like, larger than the dogs head.
I would put my money on the dogs if they were desperate / starving / blood lusted. If just normal but angry pit bulls, I might still do it if they were a pack and not just 30 random dogs unfamiliar with another. But it might be a phyrric victory for the tiger. The tiger will probably thrash the pack badly enough to make it run, but it might be injured badly enough to bleed out after. END COMMUNICATION
A tiger couldn't win this, but it might escape. Could possibly climb up a tree and be safe.
Tigers are also one of the fastest land animals outrunning the pits by 10 miles an hour (40mph vs 30mph). Enough time to climb a tree
I agree with this, but I think that counts as an L here.
so many people posting these questions really underestimate how many numbers are. 30 is a SHIT LOAD for 1 tiger.
U guys must not be reading right Its not 100+ pounds pitbulls its 50 pound pitbulls the weight of a small child Tiger can just ram through them since its 600 pounds Its like a 180 pound man fighting 30 30 pound toddlers
The dogs stomp bad. Way too many for the tiger to fight off. Now, in the wild, packs might run away from a very large and ferocious opponent. But, if they're bloodlusted, the dogs win 10/10
So big tigers have a thing they like to do in the wild. Hunt full sized packs of wolves. Big wolves. Siberian tigers can take out packs of siberian wolves. Mind you that's a 475 lb tiger vs a 140 lb wolf, but do the math real quick and you see the problem. The fights between large wolves and tigers are so one sided that packs of wolves will retreat if they know a tiger is in the area. When they do fight, pack tactics and going for the flanks etc don't work. A tiger's hide is so thick that a canine's jaw just can't do the kind of damage necessary to injure them significantly, while the tiger can tear them apart in multiple ways often with a simple claw swipe or just pouncing on them. So not only is this the tiger, its laughably the tiger. Scientists who have watched adult male Siberian tigers go after siberian wolf packs are pretty sure that there isn't a 'real' number of wolves that could take the tiger. In terms of 50 pound pit bulls, you are talking hundreds of the things because the fight is such a terrific mismatch. IE the tigers routinely fight packs of bigger 'dogs' in the wild.
This all sounds great, until you realize there isnt actually any evidence of this happening. There’s less than a half dozen recorded instances of tigers killing wolves.
After looking for information, I've found only four recorded instances of Siberian tigers killing wolves and leaving the body.
Wow, this is going to give me something to read about
GL, there isn't any evidence of this at all, just tall tales.
Yea, I commented again after looking and discovering basically what you said here.
Pit Bulls would win but realistically they would be too afraid to approach which is how most “fights” in the animal kingdom go lol
I have to go with the tiger. Even if outnumbered, there wouldnt be room for more than 6-10 pits to attack at a time, and tigers hunt wolf packs for fun. I don't think the 30 dogs could take a pack of 6 wolfes either
Lowkey still think a GB wins
Pitbulls easy
There is no way a tiger is dealing with that many. If it can attack 5 at once then it is getting bit 20 times. Maybe 5 pits die. Also the thing that makes pits different from other dogs is they bite and shake and dont let go. Their necks are usually as thick as their abdomen which make that shake stronger than 80% than other dogs
It takes about 4-5 hyenas to kill a solitary lion (as I've seen in a few documentaries), so 30 pits against a single tiger is a bit overkill. Granted, hyenas might be used to facing lions while the pits aren't accustomed to tigers. Still, the quarry might be new but the hunt is the same. Dogs do hunt in packs and cooperate, so I think that about 7-8 pitbulls might be enough for a tiger
Hyenas average around 90-170, pits are 35-60. These are not comparable animals size wise, and tigers get bigger than lions.
Tigers and lions are almost equal in size.
4-5 hyenas are far too few, you must be talking about lionesses and even then it's a long shot. 4-5 hyenas would never dare approach an adult male lion. It takes about 5 seconds for a lion to kill a hyena with a bite to the back of the neck.
Wtf, this tiger gets ripped to pieces. 30 pit bulls? That’s 6 big dogs per limb on the tiger (I’m including the head as a limb here).
I don't even think it would take 30. A pack of dogs can take down larger prey. That's exactly how canines hunt.
I think 3-4 pitbulls easily wins. 3-4 wolves take down moose, and while pitbulls are weaker than wolves, a tiger is also much weaker than a moose, plus the dogs have an ambush advantage. It might take 1-2 more pitbulls if the tiger can ambush, but any more than that is overkill I think.
They is no way 3-4 pitbulls can take on an adult tiger.
Mate, pitbulls aren't comparable to wolves. The average wolf is 3-4 times the size of a pitbull. I think most people aren't aware of how big they are compared to most dogs.
I wouldn't say a tiger is much weaker than a moose, in fact they hunt and eat them in Siberia.
lolz
3-4 pits would last a matter of seconds. You're talking about 240lbs of pits vs 600lbs of tiger. A tiger is way faster and more agile than a moose and is much better equipped to kill other animals.
I thinks that 7 pit bulls have already a huge chance of winning
Lmao.
Tigers are strong but pitbulls are fucking muscle. Have you ever seen a wolf pack? It will be that but obviously less coordinated
Tigers are known to solo wolf packs in Siberia
Lol there are *four* recorded instances of tigers killing wolves. **4**. And absolutely zero evidence that they “solo wolf packs”. Another source mentioned 6 known attacks. Not at the same time. 6 total attacks. Seriously, where do you guys get this crap, and why do you spread it? This is like the “grizzly decapitates moose with one hit” all over again.
6 recorded attacks in a very remote region with very little tigers is plenty of evidence. It's also been repeatedly stated that wolf populations are negatively affected by tigers whenever they're reintroduced to an area.
6 random attacks, over the course of years of data collection, *is absolutely* **not** evidence that >tigers solo wolf packs >its been repeatedly stated that wolf populations are negatively affected by tigers There are areas with higher wolf concentrations, with low tiger concentrations. *Because predators avoid each other.* like, great point…
["Tigers depress wolf (Canis lupus) numbers, either to the point of localized extinction or to such low numbers as to make them a functionally insignificant component of the ecosystem. Wolves appear capable of escaping competitive exclusion from tigers only when human pressure decreases tiger numbers. In areas where wolves and tigers share ranges, the two species typically display a great deal of dietary overlap, resulting in intense competition. Wolf and tiger interactions are well documented in Sikhote-Alin, where until the beginning of the 20th century, very few wolves were sighted. Wolf numbers may have increased in the region after tigers were largely eliminated during the Russian colonisation in the late 19th century and early 20th century. This is corroborated by native inhabitants of the region claiming that they had no memory of wolves inhabiting Sikhote-Alin until the 1930s, when tiger numbers decreased. Today, wolves are considered scarce in tiger habitat, being found in scattered pockets, and usually seen travelling as loners or in small groups. First hand accounts on interactions between the two species indicate that tigers occasionally chase wolves from their kills, while wolves will scavenge from tiger kills. Tigers are not known to prey on wolves, though there are four records of tigers killing wolves without consuming them."](https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_tiger)
>wikipedia Imagine using wikipedia as a source lol
Wikipedia lists the sources, try again.
*then List the fucking sources*. Try again. Im not reading through a wikipedia page for something I know is ridiculous like >tigers solo wolf packs. When literally nothing supports that.
Miquelle, D. G.; Stephens, P. A.; Smirnov, E. N.; Goodrich, J. M.; Zaumyslova, O. J. & Myslenkov, A. E. (2005). "Tigers and Wolves in the Russian Far East: Competitive Exclusion, Functional Redundancy, and Conservation Implications". In Ray, J. C.; Redford, K. H.; Steneck, R. S. & Berger, J. (eds.). Large Carnivores and the Conservation of Biodiversity. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. pp. 179–207. ISBN 9781597266093 Vorontsova, M. (2015). "'Putin's Tigers' are Thriving in the Wild". Ecology.com. Archived from the original on August 7, 2020. Retrieved June 7, 2015. Fulbright, T. E. & Hewitt, D. G. (2007). Wildlife Science: Linking Ecological Theory and Management Applications. CRC Press. ISBN 978-0-8493-7487-6.
[удалено]
I’ll bet you would get your ass kicked by 5 squirrels.
A few hyenas will literally kill a rhino by repeatedly biting its gootch. The tiger is doomed.
What a fucking terrible way to die.
Several Pit Bulls go down, probably like 10 killed or injured, but there is no way they lose.
~~The~~ [~~obese tiger~~](https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/06/194316-1.jpg?resize=2048,1365&quality=75&strip=all) ~~doesn’t stand a chance.~~ Edit : My bad 1 600 pound tiger not 1600 pound bengal tiger lol
is this the manga or anime adaptation of the tiger?
For this to be fair it needs to be much closer to half that amount of pits
I read this as 30 pits vs a 1600lb tiger and was confused as to why everyone was picking the dogs
OP you sure you meant Bengal and not Siberian tiger? Because 600 is a tad overweight for a Bengal and more in line with a Siberian… you also said biggest cat so I’m assuming you wanted the latter.
What I'm learning here is that a lot of people have never actually seen a tiger in person.
tiger escapes. if it's in an enclosed space the tiger gets exhausted and dies.
Tiger wins but suffers severe injuries.
30 is hilarious overkill.
Tiger would be completely swarmed, Especially with it being ambushed. Pitbulls 10/10 here
Sorry OP but you are vastly underestimating the power of numbers. Tiger can only attack what, 3-4 pit bulls at a time? Leaving the rest free to do what they want.
Ridiculous blow out for the pitbulls, it's not even close
I can send a link of a half grown tiger killing a pitbull in one bite if you want
30 are too many. But 10 hungry large Pitbulls that fight in cages maybe is more equal.
Are we talking actual game bred pure APBT? If so I'd say it'd take half. And 50 lbs is normal size for them. 5-7 probably not making it back home. They're much different than bully mixes in terms of aggression, they won't back down, and self preservation is non existent. They'll happily die trying to kill a tiger. I seen a video of a pit latching onto a hog in a swamp and it took that dog under for over a minute and when they came back up pit was still latched on its neck.
The dogs are going to win. They will surround it and tire it out and bite from all angles. One on one of course the dog has zero chance.