|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 2, 2023 19:22:02 GMT
Even the hard mean lion had "fights" for minutes with tiny bulldogs during its ordeal, and there were survivors. I struggle to imagine a puma coming out of that cage alive. How many Bulldogs were on those cages? 2 at a time. 6 over 3 rounds. Sometimes one would get fucked immediately and then one dog was fighting the lion, and oddly at times that one dog lasted a while before being brutalised in a way that got them dragged out, but not necessarily killed. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Dec 2, 2023 19:24:28 GMT
How many Bulldogs were on those cages? 2 at a time. 6 over 3 rounds. Sometimes one would get fucked immediately and then one dog was fighting the lion, and oddly at times that one dog lasted a while before being brutalised in a way that got them dragged out, but not necessarily killed. Alright, i thought you were trying to say that single 20kg Bulldogs were giving mean experienced Lions the fight of the lifes. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 2, 2023 19:27:07 GMT
No, but for periods single dogs fought in what was described as a "valiant" manner. Even in the case where they got wrecked.
|
|
|
|
Post by s on Dec 2, 2023 19:38:38 GMT
With "going horribly" i mean the Dogo being killed by the 65-70kg Puma without much difficulty. Despite the odds a very experienced Dogo would offer resistance for a while and put up a fight but inevitably be overwhelmed very shortly after. Considering lions have even had difficulty with similarly small bulldogs. Considering even a polar bear had difficulty with a likely 45 kgs boarhound Considering other boarhounds like Baker's Smut fought countless Sri Lankan Leopards (one of the most formidable populations with some of the larger individuals) alone deep in the wilderness without any assistance over many years and never lost ... What are you trying to claim here? That 45kg Boarhounds got into solo fights with dozens of 50-70kg Leopards and never lost? |
|
|
|
Post by s on Dec 2, 2023 19:46:58 GMT
I have no problem seeing Bulldogs and Boarhounds as formidable opponents for any wild predator close to their size. Having human carers allows these dogs to compromise attributes, both physical and mental, which are needed by a wild self sustaining animal but would be a hindrance in a fight - makes total sense. It goes without saying that the lack or minimization of these attributes would then give these dogs some key advantages over wild animals.
Homever, a 40-45kg Dogo isn't anywhere close to the size of a 65-70kg BC/Colorado/South Patagonia Puma. It's a mismatch no matter how good the Dogo is. So i don't think the Puma would experience much difficulty. Just like a 65-70kg Persian Leopard wouldn't have much difficulty beating up a 40-45kg Amur Leopard
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 2, 2023 20:24:16 GMT
Considering lions have even had difficulty with similarly small bulldogs. Considering even a polar bear had difficulty with a likely 45 kgs boarhound Considering other boarhounds like Baker's Smut fought countless Sri Lankan Leopards (one of the most formidable populations with some of the larger individuals) alone deep in the wilderness without any assistance over many years and never lost ... What are you trying to claim here? That 45kg Boarhounds got into solo fights with dozens of 50-70kg Leopards and never lost? It was a 58 kg boarhound, named smut, which lived and hunted with the famous explorer, big game hunter, soldier and author Sir Samuel White Baker in Newara Eliya in Sri Lanka in the late 1800s. And yes, that is what happened. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Dec 2, 2023 20:27:11 GMT
What are you trying to claim here? That 45kg Boarhounds got into solo fights with dozens of 50-70kg Leopards and never lost? It was a 58 kg boarhound, named smut, which lived and hunted with the famous explorer, big game hunter, soldier and author Sir Samuel White Baker in Newara Eliya in Sri Lanka in the late 1800s. And yes, that is what happened. You are going to need some hefty evidence to prove 1 - That he never ever lost even after fighting hordes of them 2 - That the Leopards were as large or larger than him 3 - that he did it alone without help from other Dogs or humans This is a very big claim so you are going to need very big evidence |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 2, 2023 20:30:42 GMT
I have no problem seeing Bulldogs and Boarhounds as formidable opponents for any wild predator close to their size. Having human carers allows these dogs to compromise attributes, both physical and mental, which are needed by a wild self sustaining animal but would be a hindrance in a fight - makes total sense. It goes without saying that the lack or minimization of these attributes would then give these dogs some key advantages over wild animals. Homever, a 40-45kg Dogo isn't anywhere close to the size of a 65-70kg BC/Colorado/South Patagonia Puma. It's a mismatch no matter how good the Dogo is. So i don't think the Puma would experience much difficulty. Just like a 65-70kg Persian Leopard wouldn't have much difficulty beating up a 40-45kg Amur Leopard I guess this is all based on the assumption a 45 kg amur leopard and a 45 kg dogo are equal, which I don't believe to be true. At all, frankly. A size advantage for the cat makes it even. Where it starts becoming uneven... not totally sure, but there are promising clues and indications where dogs performed well with weight disadvantages. I favour the cat in a fight to the death probably as early as it having a 5 kg weight advantage, and possibly even at parity, but, I envision a dominant performance from the dog with the cat eeking out a kill via accumulated damage from the bottom. As far as it being easy? Which implies a dominant victory where the puma pins the dog down and controls it without the dog having much of an opportunity to resist or struggle? I think it actually does need a good weight advantage, assuming it is a very good dog. I mean you said yourself, the dog has significant combat advantages, much more of it is dedicated to just combat (physically and mentally), so to me that means the cat needs a size advantage to make it easy and I think a decent one. Maybe 10 kgs, maybe 15, I dunno. Would go on a case by case basis. I think its easy for the dog at parity. What I have seen and read seems to align with that reality. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 2, 2023 20:33:10 GMT
It was a 58 kg boarhound, named smut, which lived and hunted with the famous explorer, big game hunter, soldier and author Sir Samuel White Baker in Newara Eliya in Sri Lanka in the late 1800s. And yes, that is what happened. You are going to need some hefty evidence to prove 1 - That he never ever lost even after fighting hordes of them 2 - That the Leopards were as large or larger than him 3 - that he did it alone without help from other Dogs or humans This is a very big claim so you are going to need very big evidence I've posted the evidence many times, it is the guy saying it. Testifying that exact situation, only the idea they were bigger than the dog is logical speculation on my part based on a reasonable assumption that smaller/female leopards would flee from such a dog. His testimony is that the dog would track leopards, refuse to be called back, they'd leave and go home, all other dogs and humans accounted for back at camp, and that lone dog would show up hours later or even the next day covered in unmistakeable leopard wounds. It happened multiple times, the dog had a full career, got elderly, lost its teeth and then finally was killed by a boar. It never lost, in that it was never killed or even badly wounded in a way that put it out of action or required medical treatment. I assume ofcourse the leopards fled after things weren't going well for them (which is a forfeit), rather than were killed, though that is entirely possible too. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Dec 2, 2023 20:35:22 GMT
You are going to need some hefty evidence to prove 1 - That he never ever lost even after fighting hordes of them 2 - That the Leopards were as large or larger than him 3 - that he did it alone without help from other Dogs or humans This is a very big claim so you are going to need very big evidence I've posted the evidence many times, it is the guy saying it. Testifying that exact situation, only the idea they were bigger than the dog is logical speculation on my part based on a reasonable assumption that smaller/female leopards would flee from such a dog. His testimony is that the dog would track leopards, refuse to be called back, they'd leave and go home, and the dog would show up hours later or even the next day covered in unmistakeable leopard wounds. It happened multiple times, the dog had a full career, got elderly, lost its teeth and then finally was killed by a boar. Being injured doesn't inherently mean you won. By that logic a Soldier that needs to be sent to emergency services after an enemy Sniper hitted his lung won and beated the Sniper. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 2, 2023 20:37:00 GMT
I've posted the evidence many times, it is the guy saying it. Testifying that exact situation, only the idea they were bigger than the dog is logical speculation on my part based on a reasonable assumption that smaller/female leopards would flee from such a dog. His testimony is that the dog would track leopards, refuse to be called back, they'd leave and go home, and the dog would show up hours later or even the next day covered in unmistakeable leopard wounds. It happened multiple times, the dog had a full career, got elderly, lost its teeth and then finally was killed by a boar. Being injured doesn't inherently mean you won. By that logic a Soldier that needs to be sent to emergency services after an enemy Sniper hitted his lung won and beated the Sniper. That's not a fight at all, and the dog didn't need medical treatment. The cat engaged in a fight with intent to kill, and failed and assuredly is the one who gave up because the dog never ever gave up in its life ever, and indeed finally proved itself "dead game" when it was willingly killed by a boar, dragging itself back into battle mortally wounded. |
|
|
|
Post by Bolushi on Dec 2, 2023 20:37:04 GMT
Why are we shocked and appalled a big boarhound raped some leopards?
|
|
|
|
Post by s on Dec 2, 2023 20:41:58 GMT
Being injured doesn't inherently mean you won. By that logic a Soldier that needs to be sent to emergency services after an enemy Sniper hitted his lung won and beated the Sniper. That's not a fight at all, and the dog didn't need medical treatment. The cat engaged in a fight with intent to kill, and failed and assuredly is the one who gave up because the dog never ever gave up in its life ever, and indeed finally proved itself "dead game" when it was willingly killed by a boar, dragging itself back into battle mortally wounded. I was thinking saying that the Soldier won because he was injured instead of killed. In any serious fight that isn't a stomp both the winner and the loser exit with significant wounds. For it to win every time i assume It would have needed to inflict . Whichever one holds the field after the battle is "victorious". This of course doesn't always mean the winner is better off after the fight. It might even be worse off. Assuming that the Dog dominated every encounter is bold. Him being overpowered by a Leopard and simply outrunning him to safety thanks to it's better stamina would be likely. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 2, 2023 20:43:42 GMT
That's not a fight at all, and the dog didn't need medical treatment. The cat engaged in a fight with intent to kill, and failed and assuredly is the one who gave up because the dog never ever gave up in its life ever, and indeed finally proved itself "dead game" when it was willingly killed by a boar, dragging itself back into battle mortally wounded. I was thinking saying that the Soldier won because he was injured instead of killed. In any serious fight that isn't a stomp both the winner and the loser exit with significant wounds. For it to win every time i assume It would have needed to inflict . Whichever one holds the field after the battle is "victorious". This of course doesn't always mean it's better off after the fight. It might even be worse off. Assuming that the Dog dominated every encounter is bold. Him being overpowered by a Leopard and simply outrunning him to safety thanks to it's better stamina would be likely. The dog was known to never ever run from a fight and ultimately fought to the death willingly when it had no teeth. There's no way it is vaguely reasonable at all to assume it was the one who backed down in any case. |
|
|
|
Post by s on Dec 2, 2023 20:44:35 GMT
I was thinking saying that the Soldier won because he was injured instead of killed. In any serious fight that isn't a stomp both the winner and the loser exit with significant wounds. For it to win every time i assume It would have needed to inflict . Whichever one holds the field after the battle is "victorious". This of course doesn't always mean it's better off after the fight. It might even be worse off. Assuming that the Dog dominated every encounter is bold. Him being overpowered by a Leopard and simply outrunning him to safety thanks to it's better stamina would be likely. The dog was known to never ever run from a fight and ultimately fought to the death willingly when it had no teeth. There's no way it is vaguely reasonable at all to assume it was the one who backed down in any case. If it had no teeth. How was he going to dominate all encounters when he can't even cause significant damage to the Leopard? |
|
