Removing weather as a factor (Heat or cold is a disadvantage to one side no matter what, and they come from completely seperate climates); Wooly Mammoth wins it. Projected that it was larger than an elephant by 3000 lbs, it basically would weigh twice as much as the largest Hippo.
Even if the Hippo got a leg, it's not pulling the mammoth in the water. And even if it cripples a leg, it's not getting the others without being knocked through the air by a giant tusk.
Originally Posted by alanm:
Now we're getting silly.
Oh, We have yet to enter silly territory. I was going to randomly draw some cards from my card game 'SuperFight' (The premise of which is essentially this conversation) and post it on here when I get home tonight to see what silliness ensues. [Reply]
I'm confused by the terms. When we say "wooly mammoth" are we talking about the extinct elephant-like mammal? When we say "hippo" are we talking about the big mammals in Africa that spend almost all of their time in a river?
Because a fight between a "wooly mammoth" and a "hippo" could just as easily describe a fight between 2 students in a dorm at an all-girl liberal arts college in Ohio. Asking for a friend. [Reply]
There should be an official website for animal vs animal theoretical combat rankings so we can get to the worlds opinion on this and other matchups. [Reply]