Remove this ad

#81 [url]

Feb 7 16 5:18 PM

Aha , yes I see the lion chasing the tiger away . Honestly that isn't a lean tiger. Looks bigger according to me. Here is a snap of two similar sized lion and tiger , but I say the tiger is slightly 'denser' ?  Ofc its the same 'skirmish' from the videos I posted up. Just the photograph has more clarity and less amateur than mine lol. 


Well , I say the lion is thicker bodywise than the Symatran , Indochinese and Malayan tigers. These species of tigers are leaner and thinner and narrow. But when it comes to the Bengals and Siberians , they do tend to be thicker/more muscular than lions on average. Though in my opinion its a close call between the bengals and the lions.

I'm sorry but I take your meetings with professionals at face valuie. I also say you as a lion fan can't accept some of my opinions or truth if you wanna call it that. It goes both ways.  And on your statement of the lion is designed for fighting and endurance ,well I have some info from an expert( or professional in your terms) that has given his opinion. I'll share that someother time.  The author of this article is actually a professional so it may be to your standards . I certainly hope so.


Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 7 16 5:34 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#82 [url]

Feb 7 16 5:32 PM

You said :
As well, the lion hold the record for being the most muscular pound for pound animal on earth.  I'll have to find that source that says that. '

Yes please do find a source for this cause I really do wanna have a read of this source.
It is SuperBowl and time for me to take the night off. Have a good night. 


Last Edited By: Ryo Feb 7 16 5:35 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#83 [url]

Feb 7 16 6:41 PM

You have to see tigers in the summer when they shed their winter coats, I can assure to you they are not stocky cats.  Lions have very thin fur, almost not even a coat, so what you see on 
their body is the true actual mass.  Tigers if mixed siberian can look much thicker than they really are with the fur puffin out, as well, the tigers have more fat under the skin on the body. 
The lion's body is really sheer muscle, its whole frame is more muscular and powerful than the tiger.  Again, the lower limbs of the tiger from what Ive seen are thicker.  

I can tell by the way your coming at this debate, the pics you post, that you do not understand these cats, and your simply hoping for what you wish to be true, but sadly do not really know.  

Countless experts of the past and present have said the lion is stronger in the front-quarters. Far to many to be wrong,  Ive personally seen it.  I could go on and on.  And I could post so many pics of even wild tigers proving this.   But its kind of a dumb debate, as its about the only debate tiger fans can have, debating measurements and weights.  They can not debate fights to the death, as they have so little that are actually legit.

Here was one of the largest recent lions not neutered, over 800lbs.  The frame design is dense and solid, compact.

A key difference in the build of the lion compared to the tiger, is the lion's shortened rear quarters. 
In the below pic of Caesar, a lion that killed 3 tigers, two almost instantly, you can see how short his rear quarters are in comparison
to the front, the neck appears very long in ratio.

This is at times where the extra weight is coming from on the tiger.  Many lions appear almost like hyenas, as if missing half the back end of their body.
This is impart to protect the lion for fighting hyenas and other lions out in the open planes, it leaves less for opponents to grab hold of from behind.  As the lions
rear is a frequent target of attack. 


Last Edited By: starfox Feb 8 16 10:52 AM. Edited 4 times.

Quote    Reply   

#84 [url]

Feb 11 16 11:11 AM

I updated the account where 3 tigers were killed in a gang fight in 1932 in Beatty's act, thanks Prime, I agree he wasn't completely sure originally which cat would win in a complete one on one earlier in his career before he staged the 3 one on one fights for the Bigcage, in which all 3 male tigers died.  I also found this post interesting form Polar bear enthusiast, he stated in Louis Roth's act a lion killed a large tiger, had not heard this particular account yet, but new Roth had seen both species kill each other as well as leopards kill tigers.

"Again, I don't trust any of these animal trainers, no matter what animal they support. Most are quite contradicting in their views. Beatty favored the lion in public, but privately, he had several of his lions killed by tigers. Louis Roth stated that he never had a tiger lose to a lion, but lo and behold, one of the heavy-side lions killed a big tiger in a fight to the death."
Quote: Polar Bear enthusiast 

Source and links,

Not sure if this info is true or not, it might not be as Roth clearly stated he's seen all theories exploded and then mentioned tigers have killed lions, leopards have killed large tigers, lions have killed polar bears, in other words a tiger killing a lion is the equivalent of a lion killing a polar bear or leopard killing a tiger. 

Quote    Reply   

#86 [url]

Feb 11 16 6:30 PM

Well if he says lions are killed in Beatty's circus, than its obvious he gets his info from Peter.  Think if he said tigers were getting killed in Beatty's circus, he'd be banned off Wildfact  fast.  

Yeah, I guess the only way to know is to buy Louis Roth's book.  But it is quite funny, these guys refuse to say who really trained Beatty and who taught him how to mix the tigers and lions, and that was Peter Taylor, not Louis Roth.  

Also just noticed Polar said Beatty thinks a tiger can kill a bear, this is actually not true, Beatty stated a bear will whip a tiger nine times out of 10.  The bear comes in with his head down protecting it, the tiger does not, it leaves its head open.  

Last Edited By: starfox Feb 11 16 7:33 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#87 [url]

Feb 17 16 5:56 AM

How is that Peter does not permit to post in a thread on big cat trainers anything related to Jacobs and all other tamers working simultaneously with both cats?

Is he paid by Koreans to spread some false propaganda?

You Starfox have been banned in Peter's forum, but has Prime also been banned there?

I do not know what could I post in Peter's forum without being automatically banned, as happened to me in Carnivora.

Quote    Reply   

#88 [url]

Feb 17 16 6:06 PM

I don't know if Prime ever joined wildfact, he might have and they probably banned him in like 5 seconds.  You should try to join and see what happens.  Peter doesn't allow anything said if it has to do with tigers losing in fights to lions.  It doesn't matter if its even coming from top trainers he'll delete it, even if there is a fight between lion's and tigers he'll delete it, it borders on paranoia and its actually pretty sad.

Also what people don't understand about Beatty is he mixed all sorts of different amounts, he has experience mixing the most diverse numbers. 

People think Beatty didn't use lioness's, but the below pic shows at times he did, close to 8 or 9 lioness's in this show.

Working with just tigers.


Working more tigers than lions.

Here is a new Clyde Beatty clip on youtube. 

Clyde Beatty's wife also worked as trainer.

Last Edited By: starfox Feb 17 16 6:52 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#89 [url]

Feb 18 16 4:34 AM

Wonderful performance. Beatty was the best.

Wildcat's most usual poster is pckts. This says enough about Peter's one-sided approach to the lion tiger debate.

Quote    Reply   

#90 [url]

Feb 18 16 11:59 AM

Catlion, do you have the original link where you got the zoologist Carnivora's quotes from, because I remember he was answering peoples questions some time back and you retrieved his remarks?

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#91 [url]

Feb 18 16 11:59 AM

Hey counter strike...good put together in the information. Havnt posted on allempires since retard baited me into getting suspended, as that was his plan all along, to get any info of lions beating tigers erased or blocked. lol As if thats ever gona happen...the data has been growing, seen some russian guys with it:

So have these guys, along with their own little sources:

Two of beattys lions use to beat up all his tigers regularly:

The animals hate each other much more deeply than they hate Beatty, whom they regard merely as an annoyance. The hate changes from day to day, but all tigers hate and fear all lions all the time. That never changes. That is why it was so why it was so hard to teach two tigresses, Rosie and Venice, to do a roll-over: they have to take their eyes off the lions while they're doing it. It's not rolling over that they mind, it's rolling over in the presence of lions. Lions also hate each other, this being conditioned by which lion is sweet on which lioness at the moment. Tiba, biggest tiger hates Betty, a lioness. Would do her in for two cents. So it goes...  They must enter the arena always in the same order. First Sascha, big lion, enters and climbs to top pedestal. He is just a plant (If allowed to come down, he would join his brother, Beauty, and together they would gang the nearest tiger, this being a regular trick of these two...  i Six or seven animals besides... Sascha do nothing but sit or. their pedestals, being either too dumb or too dangerous to fool with. 

So sascha and beauty use to always beat up his tigers.

Whats, funny have around 10 or so accounts of pckts on your videos:

Its obvious with all over exaggerated retarded post on there...ya should erase all his post that way it looks more clean and civilised, of course hes still gona come back, but with all his post gone, you can further see that alot of people are impressed with your vids...either they'll hate it, be retard or they seem to be blown away with soon as it gets traction, most likely it will be good. Posted some bear stuff here:

lol, and I never thought a grizzly fan would ever accept the lion is superior, as some russian guys linked in the l vs b thread:

That just goes to show that if theres enough...facts...(not speculation), but facts...that one could make a accurate opinion.

When I shared data with professor chavda, rangarajan, kishore, bushan and a few other indian authorities, they were all blown away with the wild accounts, and most of them even were inducted in belief that tigers were twice as big as lions, some of the basic stuff like asads weights showed that they averaged far less, and lions far more, and it seems they took a whole different view on the subject, I'm pretty sure if chavda writes another book, he will include the wild accounts and start a stable approach in searching for more historical encounters. If they accepted it, then no dought its genuine. Contacted a site that knows alot about sayajirao, and asked them what the raj was doing on 1899 november, if they come back with him doing anything else, then the baroda account is 100% fake. They have records of these guys, since they were royalty, every day was documented, so we'll see if they get back with it...and the gunga account too, as shown, charles jamrach bought that tiger, because it killed a lion in london, every tiger fan wanted to hype up the story being one of the only storys of their era, hence haughton covered it ( and look at his agenda, he went from 4 people held a tiger down to 9 lol)and the person who re-wrote the gunga/jungla story did too, these are in same effect as the boone lion parnell and ramadan bear fight, none of the originals showed the bear killed the lion, only decades to centurys later its all twisted, the same with gunga, the only originals mentions edmonds menageries incident, hence a no go. The same could be done with the king of oude, they should have records of him, and a historian on him would no dought shut the book on his so called animal baitings. Which are pretty much all the tiger fans on wildfact/wiki have. 

Would be cool to see peter back to the debate, hes all the tiger fan side ever had in terms of gathering info, we all know he wants to opine on subject, or why else did as he said, interview hundreds of people on the subject, more specifically who is tougher, who had more grit and have won in conflicts. But as all, he needs to come to senses and lean towards the truth...speaking of which, it seems that other pic, wasnt falkendorf, it was dutch ricardo, he opinioned, that a tiger would out box a lion, again, this only deprives out of that hes only worked with nearly maneless young lions:

I guess the site got it wrong but thats probably because ricardo and falkendorf look alike:

So theres not all that much for the tiger side who actually worked them both simultaneously, both wild bred, full grown, and seen many fights. Theres only one man who has done that thoroughly, and thats clyde beatty, whos also known as a scientist lol:

Clyde Beatty is not only an entertainer, he is also a scientist, a competent zoologist, 
an explorer and an adventurer. Braving African, Indian and Malayan jungles; braving
fever, disease and even death, the animal trainer, — along with scientist and explorers en-
gaged in research, — helps to broaden science frontiers in the 'dark lands". When not
employed with the cracking whip and the protective chair, he ventures forth to faraway
lands, searching for young beasts to supply the wire "prison", and searching for other
animals to be sent to zoos and museums.

Break down the word science, what did a lab coat scientist do that beatty never did? Beatty has worked with 2,000 lions and tigers, has any scientist ever done that? No, beatty has handled, touched, fought with, and knows their ability's first hand, has any scientist done that? no, they use models, which has no basis of any type of accuracy. Beatty is the ultimate scientist of lions and tigers fighting capability's. The fact that he once thought like all tiger fans, that tigers have better agility, fights with two paws ect, was proven to him the longer he was working with them. He isnt alone, the keepers in everland said that whole hordes of tigers were killed by lions there:

thirteen went the crowd was mostly dead hordes tiger 

[출처] 본 기사는 조선닷컴에서 작성된 기사 입니다

is says hordes of tigers were killed by the lions, is that why the numbers were adjusted from 13:


to 5 tigers:


were those the 8 tigers killed by the lions as the head keeper said hordes of tigers were killed by lions? as is that the reason why jeongsangjo said the lion posco and identity are dangerous have to always use cars to break up them from attacking tigers? could the head keeper said again here the lion is always the winner:

two representing the lion and tiger, feline 'Big Star' is a one-to-one who yigilkka glued to? The winner of this fight will be the same "king of beasts

[출처] 본 기사는 조선닷컴에서 작성된 기사 입니다

Look at the white tiger:
Screenshot (70)

Look at everlands real live position, and look at the artifact of a white tiger being defeated a hundred years prior:

Quite the same eh? Hence all the 100s of artifacts of lions defeating tigers are genuine and true events as well.

The siberian which was killed by the lion in yonhap jeonju.

This is because the tiger does not have a mane, which means even a dog can get the tigers neck

The breeding programme hopes to scientifically spread the genetic diversity of the remaining Siberian tigers across the world 

The height difference is substantial:

a side interview, jeong sangjo says lions strike harder:

Main weapon is also different. Tiger is quickly sliding the back foot with two paw stand standing up to attack the other. Mainly writes 'being hit' method. Jeompeuryeok and also excellent flexibility.

Lion Kill the other one blew heavy punches dog paw discards breath to ask. Speed ​​is also excellent.

If anyone can email everland and talk to jeongsangjo, I'm pretty sure they'll show countless of tigers were killed there even more. Again, people only comment on things when theres no refuting evidence, if there is a fully explained content by the head keepers that lions always kill the tigers there, then the videos would mean nothing, as they show almost nothing anyways, other than tigers constantly running, again, that souce is from the monthly chosun, a newspaper archive, not a phoney blog like the rest.

The main thing I think that would make the debate decisive, is...the accounts, historical artifacts, experts opinions...those three should solidly answer the question, added in with the lions mane consenses, and the lions striking ability...those to me now seem to hold alot of substance, since in to a counter-ject, hundreds of accounts of tigers with their throats ripped out along with every other predator as well shows how common it is, and with lions it being rare 10x fold...will highlight how durable it is, again, people only like to speak up on things when the data is small, Ive seen this every where, with regular debaters to even experts, but if the data is substantial, they dont challenge it, the only people who would, would have an agenda or bias. Thats basically all it is, is gathering the needed amount of info, counter-info and all-around info.If there is 100 sources and 100 counter sources for instance, if theirs 100 sources of experts who say the lions mane is for protection, and as a counter source, 100 photos of tigers with puncture wounds on their necks, then its solidified, this goes both ways with every catagorie, I think for the debate, once the data hits 100 for every catagorie, 100 for acounts, 100 for experts, 100 maned sources ect...then that should be a go on maybe publishing a book on the Lion vs tiger, as its a solid number and pretty much wont be beaten for some time.

The fact that the data is almost there, shows that it can be done...once a book of such is made, then it can be known world wide, at that point it doesnt need a trial of debate, as speculation would be out the door, and the facts like the accounts would be definitive to answer the long debated question of who would win 100/100 times, with the scarce accounts of tigers killing lions, it would probably be similar to beattys final take:

Beatty said he only lost one lion at 1951, plus the two a few years later, so thats 3, compared to the 53+ tigers killed by lions, with probably more records of them unknown yet, so again, close to 9 times out of ten, which would be the same with all the accounts compared...the others which state beatty lost 4 lions in his early career, were probably just exaggerations, as they always say, beatty told them, not indirectly quoteing beatty, same with alot of the tiger killing lion accounts, when ever they post it, they always add in, india tigers wouldve always have won as its reported...where? Where is it reported, no where.

If you do continue on subject you should get in the older posters to help in, asad, bold, jeninfordragon, leofwin ect, that should speed up the accounts/info...just came in to say was gona take a break from the sub. Hope all the info helped. Laters

Last Edited By: Prime Feb 19 16 3:59 PM. Edited 12 times.

Quote    Reply   

#92 [url]

Feb 18 16 1:53 PM

Prime great to see you on here, that's amazing I have never seen that account before from monthly Chosun, great find.  Its difficult sometimes to read the translation from the Korean to English, but that quote looks very clear.  Its seems pretty clear to me, that quote says one to one, that is a one on one not a gang fight, and then  it says still the same, in other words lions win in gang fights, but in a one on one the result is still the same its the King of Beast.  It looks like Big Star is a lion.   That's a pretty clear quote to what its inferring and it seems that siberian tigers were killed by throat bites, not sure if mountain cancer is the name of a tiger.

two representing the lion and tiger, feline 'Big Star' is a one-to-one who yigilkka glued to? The winner of this fight will be the same "king of beasts

Yeah I can't find anything on the Borrada king, his books don't say anything about a lion vs tiger fight.  As well there is no evidence the King of Oude had any lion vs tiger fights, he only had several small Asiatic lions used for special occasions.  One of the most recent remarkable things I found out, is the Darwin account where the tiger ripped open the lions stomach but didn't hurt the lions neck because of the mane, that lion was very old way past its prime and had very bad teeth.  I couldn't believe it, another account gone.  The Darwin account is the exact same account as Edmond's Menagerie in 1857, you can see that here,    So now this whole notion that Darwin backed the lion is thrown out the window now, and his expert quotes now prove that a very old lion's neck and throat will be protected in a fight vs a tiger. 

Yeah Peter just thinks there can be no answer, frankly because he doesn't like the outcome of the lion being on top.  Its pretty odd, no matter what evidence is shown, he'll delete it and ban you.  Sad.   Like the rest of the tiger fans complete denial.   I mean we have to make our own list in chronological order for them.   The trainer Marcel Peters  btw also backs the lion in a fight, and he's a very experienced trainer.

I think Beatty rarely had any lions die in fights to tigers, it just rarely happened, I'm sure he had a few lioness's, as showed in the previous post he had 9 lioness's once in an act.  But in 1965, the end of his career he said he couldn't think of one fight the tiger won that it didn't have a distinct advantage in, and then he mentions to top it off a big tiger who lost a fight where it had an advantage.  So this leads me to believe, that last account of Sabre in 1960 where he or she killed two lions, Sabre must of had an advantage, perhaps attacking by surprise, and the victims being either an old lion or a young one with little mane just being broken into the act, both scenarios are possible.

Quote    Reply   

#93 [url]

Feb 18 16 2:00 PM

Back to the sculptures are we .....You know that's a cool piece of art to own.

Anyway you might wanna check this out Prime.....wriiten by a guy called Matti who is a strenght coach and been in the Israeli defence army. You may ask why I'm telling you this but according to him the tiger comes out first. And this guy knows his stuff. Not to be messed with. Of course not a Beatty or a Proske  etc but it made for a fun read and I wanted to post it here.

DISCLAIMER : I have in no way written this article lol. Just found it and put it out there. [/size]

This guy who ever he is, has never even worked with a lion or tiger, never mind mixing them, or weighing them or researching them or dissecting them.  So its pretty much of a joke comment, if he saw all our accounts he'd probably be pretty upset, or you would.


Last Edited By: starfox Feb 18 16 2:37 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#94 [url]

Feb 18 16 2:14 PM

You've have gut a be kidding me, you made that post up, every expert understands that the tiger is stronger in the front quarters, really what experts are those?  What a joke, you guys are more desperate than I thought.  So who are you P. Tigris or Pckts, or are you guys the same person?

Prime yeah, I was looking through the pics of Capt. Dutch Ricardo, that's actually pretty sad, like a lot of guys in the early 20s and before they mixed a lot of young cats not full grown, I didn't see one full grown lion or tiger that he was photographed with.  As well in another source, it is clear that Capt. Dutch was totally bias and didn't like lions, comparing them to slums and the tiger to aristocrats, this sounds like Pckts or something. 

Capt. Dutch quote below.

Quote    Reply   

#95 [url]

Feb 18 16 3:15 PM

Ryo wrote:
And you mentioned Mike Rodriguez? Oh I like how this guy whipped you on youtube. I'm gonna have to say something to him. Maybe he'll join this site ? lol


How desperate are you, show me a list right now in chronological order of tigers killing male lions?  You can't, because there practically are none, so you wont do it.  So by not making your list in chronological order, your proving to yourself that even you secretly know, there are so few accounts of a tiger killing a full grown healthy male lion.  So if you know that, then what are you doing on here goofing around.  What's the purpose, I mean its ridiculous, or are you still on meds?

Quote    Reply   

#96 [url]

Feb 18 16 3:27 PM

The list has been made on other sites. Raja's done a great job. And so has Tigris.
Few accounts you say ....hmmmm. 

  I know the list that have like a gazillion repeats in them.  Not talking about those, I'm talking about a list in Chronological order genius. 

Last Edited By: starfox Feb 18 16 3:37 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#97 [url]

Feb 18 16 3:35 PM

Ryo wrote:
Beat down , oh yeah. Listen you scum for you to call me a coward why are you taking down my posts , especially the last one where I cut your face open? Don't be a wimp and cry baby and only show people what YOU want them to see. Let people read ALL my responses to you .

You are so dumb, Prime isn't taking down your post I am, and I"ll continue to unless you post evidence with real data. 

Quote    Reply   

#99 [url]

Feb 18 16 3:47 PM


There is a lot of stuff in the Barroda fight that does not seem accurate and it seems made up, we have the full description of the fight wiki does no go into the backround of any of these fights and its a lot of you guys uploading data to wiki.  Just want to let you know, if your not going to be up front about who you are, and you wont put your list in chronological order, I'm going to have to ban you.


Tiger kills lion, Indian Gaekwar Rajput King of Barroda, stages fight.

If this account is real, it is a fair fight.  But upon further research, there seems to be no records of the Gaekwar ever staging this fight. His name was Sayajirao Gaekwad III.  The account is also extremely detailed as if written by a professional author or story teller.  At one point it says the lion knocked the tiger 20 ft, this would seem exaggerated or made up.  It also says the lion was bleeding and cut on the back and shoulders.  A barbary lion's mane is so thick, it is almost impossible for the shoulder area to show through to an audience...and would unlikely be the area that would be cut or torn. It also states the lion had a yellow face, but it is apparent that a Barbary lion's body coat and face is a trade-mark darker brown.  The account is so detailed, with even the times being mentioned, the event was supposed to be huge and elaborate; that there must be some confirmation from another source that the Gaekwad staged this fight.  If no other sources can be found, it is doubtful the account is real, or ever happened.    
Another user as well studying this subject contacted several historians, and asked if they new of any records of this fight taking place with the Gaekwad at Vadodara.  The historians could report no known instance of this happening, and only were able to come up with a Buffalo fight and elephant fights. 


Last Edited By: starfox Feb 18 16 3:55 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#100 [url]

Feb 18 16 4:18 PM

I'm gonna try to be impartial here ...i note your points and they are well presented. Furthermore, if this account is real then it is a fair fight.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help