|
Girth Comparaison of Animals
|
Spalea says: The grizzly has a greater chest girth than the tiger, I don't contest that !
hip hip Hurray!
About all of the various animal shapes; IMO... when doing a comparison to determine which animal species has the greater girth, neither animal should be penalized for his body shape. I do not make a fuss over the fact that a grizzly has a longer neck than a tiger. In measuring and comparing them at equal head-and-body length, ( peg-to-peg in a straight line ) we have a fair comparison of girth.
If we were talking about a face-off confrontation, then we would use neither length parity nor weight parity. We would want them at size-parity. This topic pops up so often in animal face-off debates that I have decided to give it a topic page all its own. SIZE PARITY ... we can use tiger vs grizzly as an example. We have numerous ideas about exactly what constitutes size parity. For some, it means weight parity. Example: 500 pound tiger vs 500 pound grizzly. However, in such a face-off, the tiger will measure at least a foot ( 31 cm ) longer in head-and-body length and in bipedal height. Another method is height-and-length parity. Example: A tiger and a grizzly each standing 7 feet tall ( 2.13 m ) bipedal in a face-off. The bear has at least a 100 pound ( 45 kg ) weight advantage. Therefore, a true size parity face-off should be a lion or tiger with a slight advantage in length and height vs a grizzly with a slight weight advantage - Two similar-sized animals. Bottom line; Mother Nature seldom arranges a fair fight. IMO - if two animals are fighting, and which opponent is the biggest of the two fighters is not completely and overwhelmingly obvious, then you have a size-parity face-off. There is no need to weigh and measure down to the micro-millimeters or micro-milligrams. They do not have to be exactly the same size. Just use your eyes. If there is no undeniable size difference; if one opponent does not tower over the other or dwarf the other, then we have a size-parity face-off. When Muhammad Ali fought George Foreman, that was a size-parity fight. When Dwayne Johnson ( the Rock ) fought Bill Goldberg, that was a size parity fight. Brock Lesnar vs Chris Jericho is not a size-parity face off. Randy Orton vs Braun Stroman is not a size-parity face-off.  *This image is copyright of its original author
@
@
About #182: I am always reluctant as concerns the "size parity" concept. Why to wish decrease the dimensions of the former to the latter's ones ? By doing this you would oppose a one specy subadult against a full grown adult of the other specy... As you say "Mother Nature seldom arranges a fair fight". If one opponent is heavier he would enjoy one advantage that is all. 
I think the discussion about Chest girth and weight", "chest girth, weight and different body lengths" came after few posts..
SO its better to split this thread .. can someone suggest me from where we should split ? (04-18-2018, 10:13 AM)sanjay Wrote: I think the discussion about Chest girth and weight", "chest girth, weight and different body lengths" came after few posts.. True ! That started seriously to speak about dimensions (weight, body length, chest girth and so on.) at the page 4... But what about the first three ? It was going in several different directions before being focused. (04-18-2018, 09:56 AM)Spalea Wrote: @ There are numerous populations of Ursus arctos. In some populations, a mature boar weighs within the 300 pound range, in some 700 or even 800 pound range, and in others every weight in-between. Therefore we are not speaking of sub-adult animals. As for measuring length for a girth comparison, a grizzly measuring as long as a tiger in head-and-body length is pretty much ( I think ) rather a normal-sized Usurri brown bear boar. *Perhaps a title: "Girth Comparison"
@
About #187: concerning this topic, "Girth Comparaison" would be a good title. Do we take it ? 
Done guys.. new name is: Girth Comparaison of Animals
Let me know if it is good ? (03-30-2018, 07:15 PM)Pckts Wrote:(03-30-2018, 03:53 PM)brotherbear Wrote: Point in case: Show me a tall slender Olympic weight-lifter gold medalist. Mark Henry is 6 ft 4 in, and that's not short. But I was not referring to him in particular; just showing how a strong man is built; not like a basketball player. I have yet to see a tall skinny man win gold in weight-lifting. Girth takes on meaning in a contest of strength.
The girth measuring disagreement between tiger and grizzly began at the top of page #4.
 (04-19-2018, 07:38 PM)brotherbear Wrote:Weight lifting builds mass... of course a more built person is going to win a weight lifting event, but a tall man can and has won just as easily as a short man, but you'll never see a "tall skinny man" competing in a weightlifting event because your body builds muscle after repeated trauma, which is what weightlifting is.(03-30-2018, 07:15 PM)Pckts Wrote:(03-30-2018, 03:53 PM)brotherbear Wrote: Point in case: Show me a tall slender Olympic weight-lifter gold medalist. We were talking about natural strength of different body types.  *This image is copyright of its original author You said a short stocky man would be stronger than a tall skinny man, that of course isn't correct. Also, you say "win gold in weightlifting," so your definition of strength is defined by 2 events? You also make an assumption that basketball players aren't strong... That is also baseless. Sports specific strength plays a huge role in the build of an athlete. A basketball player needs to be strong with great cardio, large muscles take up oxygen and thus aren't beneficial for a cardio demanding sport but they have many examples of extreme strength in basketball. Both Shaq and Charles are old men here and still able to put up 405 on the bench, both have probably not touched a weight in years, also take into account the distance the weight travels and the technique used. You wont know this but there are tricks to power lifting, yes these guys are extremely strong but the goal is to make the bar travel the least amount of distance as possible. How do they accomplish this... You create a gap on the bench, you tuck your tailbone in, you arch your lower spine, blow your chest up, take a wide grip and thus the bar only has to travel a small distance. Shorter limbs benefit lifts like the bench and squat. But I guarantee you, put a strongman under the basket and have him try to box out Barkley or Shaq and he'll get tossed around like a rag doll. I've said it before, but once again, there is no cut and dry lift to declare strength, feats of strength are many and some of the strongest men on the planet still have weak spots, it's never a black and white issue. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |