I was having a discussion with a friend yesterday, which became increasingly bizarre. We began a talking about politics and war, but ended out out discussing who would be most likely win in a fight between 10 unarmed men vs 1 tiger.

Post which you think would win followed by an explanation or some reasoning. In this hypothetical scenario NO OBJECTS are available and the environment is an open area which doesn't advantage the men or the tiger. If there are some good replies, my friend and I will pick a winner.

The best post will be awarded this excellent prize!

prdsidnt pls.

dolaned wll coem rpe de tigar.

How are they going to injure the tiger? Poke his eyes out?

10 guys should definitely be able to kill a tiger. Poke its eyes, overwhelm it and strangle it. If couple of the men were midgets the rest could use them as weapons as well.

I reckon I could handle it on my own.

Quote from Dennis93 :

prdsidnt pls.

dolaned wll coem rpe de tigar.

denis pls

Quote from hrtburnout :

I reckon I could handle it on my own.

u sure?

Provided they didn't all try and attack it one at a time, the tiger might kill two or three, but the rest could eventually jump on it's back and poke it's eyes out. They could then work in teams to tire it out.

What about this one:
Which would win in the following fight? A duck the size of a horse, or 100 horses the size of ducks?

The ten guys (assuming healthy men, no extra fighting skills) will win, but with some casualties. The tiger will however die a slown and painfull death. I don't think a man has enough power to break a tiger's neck. He'd probably be just kicked and beaten to death...slowly. Poor tiger.

Of course the question is wrong in itself. Man do not need to fight tigers barehanded. We can kill them many ways without having to lift our arses from the seats. We could just nuke it for example. The tiger is just as free to develop nukular technology as us so it is fair fight.

Quote from Crashgate3 :

Provided they didn't all try and attack it one at a time, the tiger might kill two or three, but the rest could eventually jump on it's back and poke it's eyes out. They could then work in teams to tire it out.

What about this one:
Which would win in the following fight? A duck the size of a horse, or 100 horses the size of ducks?

100 Horses the size of ducks.

However if you said a Swan the size of a horse then god help us all....

Quote from Hyperactive :

Of course the question is wrong in itself. Man do not need to fight tigers barehanded. We can kill them many ways without having to lift our arses from the seats. We could just nuke it for example. The tiger is just as free to develop nukular technology as us so it is fair fight.

ROFL

Or is it possible to use a drone, then the 10 people could stay in the pub and deal with the tiger with their phone. Macca's does cheap wireless so if the pub doesn't appeal then a nutritious meal of pink slime and coke and then deal with the tigers ! A winning strategy.

I think there may be an issue with nuclear technology and no opposable thumb but the concept is interesting with giving tigers access to technology. Possibly some deal with the tiger and he could employ his own drone technology and deal with as many people as he chooses. After all the tiger tends to live in areas with tradable resources and if PETA got involved then that would give it that green selling point.

Of course, if the tigers agreed to a central bank and a carbon trading scheme then they'd be given as many weapons as they need to take over and remove the human threat.

Go tigers ...............

Muummh this got little ''offtopic''... oh THIS IS offtopic

**** that. Tiger fer sure

Quote from Sueycide_FD :

**** that. Tiger fer sure

what have you done to your cute avatar

People would be too scared to attack all at once, and tiger would eat them one by one.

The Tiger, based on evidence provided by the Romans, and those were usually armed men.

Quote from presidentblair :

Post which you think would win followed by an explanation or some reasoning. In this hypothetical scenario NO OBJECTS are available and the environment is an open area which doesn't advantage the men or the tiger. If there are some good replies, my friend and I will pick a winner.
[/IMG]

There's no such thing as an open area that does not advantage the tiger - they were built to live in large, open areas. The humans should at least have a couple of Uzis to balance it out.

Quote from Yuri Laszlo :

There's no such thing as an open area that does not advantage the tiger - they were built to live in large, open areas.

I thought they lived in forests?

Quote from Wikipedia :

Bengal tigers live in many types of forests, including wet, evergreen, the semi-evergreen of Assam and eastern Bengal; the mangrove forest of the Ganges Delta; the deciduous forest of Nepal, and the thorn forests of the Western Ghats. Compared to the lion, the tiger prefers denser vegetation, for which its camouflage colouring is ideally suited, and where a single predator is not at a disadvantage compared with the multiple felines in a pride.

Quote from Crashgate3 :

I thought they lived in forests?

Quote from Wiki :

Today, they range from the Siberian taiga to open grasslands and tropical mangrove swamps.

They live on all kinds of "land"... But I think they prefer sneaking as close as possible to their prey through high grass (or low bushes) and then run like hell in the open until they catch their prey.

The 10 guys would shit in their pants and the 2 meters tiger would play with them like real toys ...

Quote from Crashgate3 :

I thought they lived in forests?

The question isn't soecifically about bengal tigers, though.

Lanchesters n-squared law denotes a victory for the men, with 1 wounded man.

If it was 10 women however the result would be down to a committee and group consensus with the rights of the tiger being considered.

Think about possible strategies.
The tiger claws and teeth can incapacitate a man in mere seconds.

So are ten men enough to keep control of all those dangerous weapons of the tiger? Two men to hold each limb and two men to hold the head, can they do that? (not a chance, I think)

Poke the eyes out, without getting your gut ripped out by a paw stroke.

There might be a working strategy but I think not.

It's funny to say that the 10 men will lose. Since we've been hunting since the dawn of man, even beasts bigger than a little tiger.

First of all they would just use anything lying around, even if it's only grass, to fancy any kind of weapon, maybe a garrote.
If they knew the tiger was coming, they could set up a trap.

In a show down, eye in eye, the 10 men will stand little chance because we are cowards. But since they will run 'till they can come up with a plan, they will win eventually even if 9 of the men died.

Also with our SUPER intellect, as proven here on the forum lots of times..., we can just give him some poisonous food and it's fixed....

Conclusion: as long as those 10 guys can think for 10 seconds they win, but since most people don't think anymore they'll probably lose...

Grtz:
PS: People train animals, animals let themselves be dominated by us. Look at the lion that got reunited with his alpha HUMAN males...
So I'd just train the tiger to go get some gazelle for me...