Evidently you must of missed the memo that lions have killed tigers more than vice versa in captivity over 50+ times:
You must of not known that in the wild the only one is documented winning is the asiatic lion, that the lion has the bigger skull, harder bite force, and stronger strikes:
That leopards and bears have been known to kill bengal tigers:
The size advantage you speak of is non-existant, even a 1,000 lb tiger lost to a smaller lion, a lion is capable of killing bears who dwarf any tiger in existance:
The lion has almost every advantage over the tiger via:
- Taller at the shoulder with longer, heavier front limbs (is the tallest living panthera species)
- Heavier on average (as a species majority near twice the weight)
- More muscle mass (has the record of the most skeletal muscle percent of all mammals)
- Has a much stronger striking force (has the record for the strongest predators paw blow)
- Has a stronger bite force (has the record for most powerful bite of all mammals 1,250 psi)
- The lion has a protecting factor, the tiger doesnt (known for the only big cat to have one)
- Is a more practiced and skiled fighter month to month (is the only who can consistantly via prides)
- Hunts bigger animals (giant elands, buffalo, hippos, giraffes rhinos, elephants)
Proven with facts from Phd biologist and zoologist, head animal keepers from circuses, zoos and sanctuarys, animal tamers and animal trainers all unanimously in favor of the lion...in your case, you havnt seen a tiger or lion in your entire life, listining to eye of the tiger does not mean you have a Phd on subject, cite the proper sources to your claims who do, other wise you're argument is nothing more than bias lies.