| Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Is their a land animal ever that could PREDATE on the SPANISH BULL? (no dinosaurs) | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 13 2017, 09:07 PM (7,834 Views) | |
| Spartan | Jan 26 2017, 10:41 PM Post #76 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, no shi.t. Just because it's worse than a sword doesn't mean it's bad. It's still better than any natural weapon.
It was pragmatic if the user was skilled enough. The reason it was never widely used was because it was extremely hard to pull off compared to simply using a shield instead. |
![]() |
|
| Cat | Jan 27 2017, 12:21 AM Post #77 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I know that a number of you guys do not agree, but a Cape buffalo bull would be much more formidable than a Spanish bull. I know that Spanish bulls are extremely dangerous animals, but nobody would bring a Cape buffalo in an arena, it would be a slaughter. So, to answer your question lions, tigers and big bears would do the job. Of course it would be a very risky enterprise, and some would certainly pay with their life. Big prehistoric mammal predators (like bear-dogs, sabertooth and short-faced bears) would also be able to predate on them. I don't mention crocs here, as I don't think they would qualify as land animals. |
![]() |
|
| SquamataOrthoptera | Jan 27 2017, 01:21 AM Post #78 |
![]()
15 year old keyboard warrior!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Has anyone mentioned Megalania yet? It would almost surely kill a Spanish Bull. |
![]() |
|
| SETA222 | Jan 27 2017, 02:10 AM Post #79 |
![]()
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes, first page. |
![]() |
|
| hawkkeye | Jan 27 2017, 05:27 AM Post #80 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually, it´s only pragmatic if you fight against guy with one sword. And even then your advantage it´s not that big (if both of you use longsword), because you can´t do some interesting tricks like halfswording or most of the pommel strikes when holding sword only in one hand. If guy with sword and shield (even buckler) fight against guy with two swords, he wins pretty easily most of the times. And I mean overwhelming victory, because shield pretty much negate every advantage you got from two long blades. Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 27 2017, 05:30 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Jan 27 2017, 05:43 AM Post #81 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Whatever. The fact remains that it's by no means a sign of weakness for any animal to get killed by a man with a sword, otherwise we'd also have to call grizzlies, lions and tigers "unimpressive". |
![]() |
|
| hawkkeye | Jan 27 2017, 05:53 AM Post #82 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Then, go ahead and show me account of bears, lions and tigers killed by swords so often and easily as spanish bulls. Even Roman venatios fought them in armor and mostly use spear or trident when gighting beasts, gladius only in lesser extent. |
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Jan 27 2017, 06:25 AM Post #83 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you being dense on purpose? There are obviously no accounts of them being "so often and easily" killed as spanish fighting bulls since there are no organized fights against large predators anymore. I've shown you accounts of untrained people killing grizzlies and lions with freaking knives (and there are also some of elderly men killing leopards and cougars with knives and even pocket knives (!)) so it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a trained man with a much larger sword could kill these animals on a regular basis.
Which was still pretty often in absolute terms and contrary to what you claimed earlier the venatores almost always won. Edited by Spartan, Jan 27 2017, 06:26 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| hawkkeye | Jan 27 2017, 05:19 PM Post #84 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh, I don´t say to you that they use gladius with shield. Using only gladius get you killed most of the time in fight with wild animals. EDIT: they use shield because it can hold attacking animal in distance in which they can kill him with gladius. And only use them against animals light enough (at least at the only few scenes on masaics where they use gladius) to hold them at range at least for awhile. Like here: http://i37.tinypic.com/1zp1941.jpg . 95 percent depictions of venatios show them with spears. I suppose you know (or at least you will read) about them before you wrote something - my bad. Yes, they kill bears wit knives. In CLOSE COMBAT. Body on body. And we are talking about real world, not some your favourite pc game - sword is different weapon, not only longer knife with better stats. In body on body combat with animals (like combats in accounts you didn´t show to me, but you can find them on internet) knife is better. Even gladius is better, because it has shorter blade. Because killing blow with shorter blade is easier in BODY ON BODY fights. This is why was dual wield with two long blades so rarely used compared to dual wield with long and short blade (which was used rarely compared to shield and sword or only sword). Because if you got body on body with your oponents, with short blade you can kill him quickly. Ok, now even you can understand it, I suppose. This is why I´m ´dense,´ as you wrote. You don´t show me accounts, don´t understand logical arguments and I bet that you don´t have any experience with historic fencing. And, before you start your rant again, yes spears are even worse in body on body fights than swords, but they greately decrease the chance that you even engage animal you fight in close combat. This is WHY (I wrote it to you third time, isn´t? Am I a patient little teacher, am I?) venatios used spears most of the times, people use them in hunting instead of swords and if someone choose RARE hunting technique with sword, he used BOAR SWORD (like this https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/07/34/b1/0734b19d1dc48693a6244781832d14e8.jpg or http://files.musquet.com/files/products/1/851/resizedimage2.foto_6_372.56a8be28651ba.jpg) which was spearlike. And even after, hunting with them was considered brave because of their inferiority to hunting spears. Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 27 2017, 06:24 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Grazier | Jan 27 2017, 06:16 PM Post #85 |
|
Omnivore
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I would rate the gladius sword as the ideal weapon to kill a beast. A long and/or thin sword would not be good, I think it's no coincidence the culture that fought animals with swords more than any other had the gladius, it's perfect. Something you can just jam in behind the shoulder. That boar sword is ludicrous. A laughable larper creation is my guess. Note - I have actually stabbed boars in real life. I, like everyone else, used knives like this- ![]() the only sword I've ever seen I'd maybe be comfortable using is the roman gladius, and it's the only sword I'd be game to use on any animal. |
![]() |
|
| The All-seeing Night | Jan 27 2017, 10:00 PM Post #86 |
![]()
You are without honor
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Then, if you happen to have a sword, just don't fight the animals in body-on-body combat. And a sword doesn't? |
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Jan 28 2017, 01:01 AM Post #87 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You're still arguing what's better which was never the point. Of course a shield in addition to a sword will be better than only a sword.
You realize that a sword also decreases the chance to engage the animal in "body on body" combat compared to a knife, don't you?
Lol what? I've shown you four accounts: http://carnivoraforum.com/single/?p=10019902&t=30054362 And here some more: 61 year old man kills 100lbs cougar with pocket knife after being ambushed: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Attacking-cougar-killed-with-pocket-knife-1092755.php 66 year old man kills leopard with knife : http://www.mmegi.bw/index.php?aid=47430 Man kills tiger with sword, but dies in the process: http://burmatoday.net/burmatoday2003/2004/03/040301_manandtiger_kaladan.htm Man kills brown bear with a carpenter's axe: http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/2013/05/26/Bosnian-shepherd-kills-attacking-bear-with-an-axe1 And none of these were professionals like the Matadors nor were these fights as rigged. Crazy Spaniards slaying bears only with a "light sword": https://yankeebarbareno.com/2012/08/03/gladiator-games-of-bulls-and-bears-a-california-blood-sport-1800s/
Obviously they would not have done this if it meant certain death or did not have at least rather high chances of winning.
You're acting like bull fighting somehow isn't a batsh.it crazy activity or like it's not dangerous.
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-27520374 So your statement that "Yes, I don´t have respect for animal that can be easily avoided and killed be short spanish guys with swords" is ignorant at best. |
![]() |
|
| hawkkeye | Jan 28 2017, 02:54 AM Post #88 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, sword don´t decrease chance to hand to hand combat that much as a spear. And thank you Spartan, for accounts showing that I´m right that knife is better than sword in close fight - there´s only one account of killing bears with swords. And one about a guy who die while killing tiger - because in close combat, you just can´t kill the animal as quickly with long blade as with knife (as I wrote... Many times.) And about dangers of bullfighting - yes, it´s more dangerous than being a plumber. Even more dangerous than beeing a futball player... And here are actual numbers: ´The World Society for the Protection of Animals estimates that around 40,000 bulls are killed each year in European bullfights (Spain, Portugal and France). In Spain, 3,200 official bullfights take place annually. About 210,000 bulls die every year in Latin American bullfights (Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and Venezuela).´ And about matadors... ´Fifty-two matadors have been killed in the arena since 1700. In 1934, Ignacio Sánchez Mejías (a friend of poet Federico García Lorca) was gored and died from a gangrene infection. The most recent fatality was José Cubero (“Yiyo”), who was gored in the heart in 1985.´ Yes, there´s a matador, Víctor Barrio, who get killed last year in arena. First since 1985. Yes, it´s really dangerous - with thousand of killed bulls every year last matador died in 1985, if I don´t count the one who die in 2016 - first one after 31 (!) years. Source: http://iberianature.com/spain_culture/tag/how-many-bullfighters-have-been-killed/ Oh, and about danger of spanish bulls... Even deaths with running with the bulls (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_of_the_Bulls#Injuries.2C_fatalities_and_sanitary_attention) are actually pretty rare (but every few years some guy die), even that are nontrained individuals who run with bulls. Yes every year some of them are injured but... Use the cape buffalos, gaurs of even red deer males instead of them. I bet that casualties would be much bigger (of course, if deers start running with guys and no fighting with each other). Edited by hawkkeye, Jan 28 2017, 03:23 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Spartan | Jan 28 2017, 03:50 AM Post #89 |
|
Kleptoparasite
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Nice straw man. I never claimed that.
No there is not. It obviously implies that this happened more than once.
Because a middle aged Indian with no experience whatsoever in fighting tigers with a sword is representative. Impressive enough that he managed to kill the animal. It also says this
Read the link I provided.
So injuries are received in ca 7% of all fights with some of them life threatening. The reason so few matadors die is the superb medical treatment they receive (unlike the bulls).
Lol so? Do you seriously think such a bull couldn't easily kill an unarmed human if it wanted? Edited by Spartan, Jan 28 2017, 03:53 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| hawkkeye | Jan 28 2017, 04:45 AM Post #90 |
|
Autotrophic Organism
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No you are just talking that sword is better than spear when fighting animals. And you last pathetic sentence... Do you even understand what I wrote? I´m writing about their ´dangerousness.´ They are not as dangerous as you think - Therefore the relativelly small injury/fatalities rate in running with bulls. Because spanish bulls are not as prone to attack as you think. 7 percent rate is really big... ´Working primarily with fellow medical researchers Laura Donaldson and Bing Li, Dr. Cusimano established that 825 of the players – or 63.1 per cent – missed one game or more to injury over that time period.´ In hockey. Yes, injury in hockey isn´t as bad like in bull fight. But you still have much greater rate here than in a sport with 400kgs bull trying to get you. Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/the-true-cost-of-injuries-to-nhl-players-218-million-each-season/article16403001/ |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Zoological Debate & Discussion · Next Topic » |




![]](http://b2.ifrm.com/28122/87/0/p701956/pipright.png)






4:50 PM Jul 13