Mr.happy debates with carnosuar

Spino wasn't really low to the ground, moreso it was top heavy. Most of its weight was located directly in front of the hips, after all.i'd to point out this doesn't make the animal unbalanced, as this is countered by its extremely long tail. same goes for Oxalaia. This is the thing with your comparison though happy; This is tarbosaurus, not tyrannosaurus. T. bataar was significantly smaller ten its north american relative. This is indicative it was shorter overall too, so the neck probably wouldnt have been in biting range. oxalaia, though smaller, is in all likelyhood a species of spinosaurus; where as tarbo is a different species( despite common belief. Z. magnus was closer to t.rex then tarbo is) this is shown in its slender body type.

Tarbo in yellow.

There's really nothing to sugest spino( or oxalaia for this matter) was an obligate quadrupedal animal. Not much of the forelimbs have been found, and it isn't clear if they could be used in supporting its weight.

Anyways..

Looking at Tarbo's skull, it's clearly not as heavily built as tyrannosaurus'. The snout is thinner, and the teeth are more blade ike rather then "railroad spike- esque"

This suggests T. bataar wasn't adept at crushing at its bigger north american counterpart.

Oxalaia had conical teeth that were perfectly suited for gripping. This means that when it got its teeth around a prey item; even a rival predator, it wasn't going to let go. This is where its forelimbs come into play -- they can be used in aiding to pin or subdue a struggling animal. At the very least, create very large gashes. If Oxalaia can control the head with its forelimbs, and secures a neck bite, this fight is over. it won't have any issues rearing up, big mammalian carnivores(e.g. ursines, felids) commonly rear up to use their forelimbs in inter & intraspecific conflict

I will interupt to say that this particular oxalia is a normal one and not a quadruped.

I think i can work with this "version" of O. quilombensis, TK.

How could oxalaia rear up and use its forearms effectively? well...

Bear v cougar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-ByFv5pGdA

Rearing up can be advantegeous not only to go on the offensive, but for "bluffing" a rival. The sail/ridge-like structure of Oxalaia can serve as an intimadation factor and make the big tyrannosaur hesitate. Like in the video i linked above, Oxalaia can use this to its advantage and go on an all out offensive.

Forelimbs, like i said before, are extremely advantegous for the spinosaur. A marauding tarbosaurus really only has its skull for weaponry, and when it tries to go in for a bite, the Oxalaia can certainly deflect such blows and counter.

For example, look at this leopard v hyena video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zs-YW_BBEK0

Ignoring the fact the leopard fled, it was able to deflect the jaws of the hyena to prevent it from getting a vital bite in. This would be how Oxalaia would deal with the jaws of the tyrannosaur, and in a fight to the death, being able to counter an opponents attacks effectively is a critical point; which in this case favors the spinosaur

That is a tiger, not a leopard or cougar.

Interesting points. Don't have anything ATM, sorry, I just logged on to say I won't be able to respond until Monday afternoon (busy as heck today, hunting course tomorrow all day, then back to school). 

carno, no. You are gonna use the regular oxalia not the quadruped one. There is no  evidence to prove it. This is final.

I hope I didn't sound mean.

I see that Tarbo was thinner than Rex, and I see that it's teeth were more blade like. Perhaps it didn't have the bone shattering seven ton bite force of its larger cousin, but a three ton bite would have been sufficient for animals similar in size to Tarbo, and with slashing teeth, it would have caused a lot of bleeding. It may not have crushed bone easily, but it could easily rip through flesh, causing its opponent to die of blood-loss rather quickly if a good bite was made. Same goes for Oxalaia controlling a similar sized predator by biting its neck because it has to be well placed.

Obviously, yes, the forelimbs would be important and could possibly give Oxalaia an edge, as would the sail for the purpose of bluffing, but that sail would likely also be a target if it gets to the battle phase. Usually, a fight would consist of intimidation attempts, where, I'll admit it, Oxalaia had a bit an edge with the sail.

Also, like any battle, it would come down to experience. An experienced Tarbo vs a younger or less experienced Oxalaia, Tarbo has an edge. If it's two experienced individuals, they may know what they're up against and both back off, or a battle of epic proportions ensuing.

 I see that it's teeth were more blade like. Perhaps it didn't have the bone shattering seven ton bite force of its larger cousin, but a three ton bite would have been sufficient for animals similar in size to Tarbo, and with slashing teeth, it would have caused a lot of bleeding. It may not have crushed bone easily, but it could easily rip through flesh, causing its opponent to die of blood-loss rather quickly if a good bite was made. Same goes for Oxalaia controlling a similar sized predator by biting its neck because it has to be well placed.

My bad, i didn't clarify much. Tarbo's teeth are suited for crushing, but not nearly to the extent that Tyrannosaurus possesses.

Also, like any battle, it would come down to experience. An experienced Tarbo vs a younger or less experienced Oxalaia, Tarbo has an edge. If it's two experienced individuals, they may know what they're up against and both back off, or a battle of epic proportions ensuing

Shouldn't we use two animals that are equally as experienced to even this out? I think that's the most applicable here

Haha, I get it. Not crushing teeth like the teeth of Rex, but not full on slashers either. Kind of a hybrid between crushing and slashing. That would be interesting to see just what teeth like that could have done.

As for the experience, of course it makes sense to use two that are of similar experience, but the question is how much experience.

If they are both rather new to fighting large predators, neither will have a clue what to do, and they'll probably awkwardly bite, lunge and slash.

If both have decent experience, it'll be an interesting battle, both having an idea on what to do, but not having the experience to know exactly what they want to do.

If both have a ton of experience, one of the best battles you'll ever see.

No, I'm done. This was actually pretty fun, and you did good too, as expected. 

Gojira and something real are judges.

CARNOSAUR and MR. HAPPY9097 - This was an exceptionally fun and extremely informative debate to read! As the appointed judge of your exchange, I've read each of your points and counterpoints many times over in order to make a decisive call on this. I muist say that this was an exceedingly difficult judgement to make as you both evidenced remarkably flexible and clear language in addition to presenting your information in manner that was readily accessible to the reader. I applaud you both! I'll spare you the details on the ad-hoc percentiles I utilize to determine the victors of these debates, however, CARNOSAUR edged out the competition with a score of 9.1 - securing victory! MR. HAPPY9097 came in with a score of 8.9 - a debate total that is marked as extraordinary!

    You both should be extremely proud of the exchange you've just completed! It was cordial, controlled, and, above all else, marvelously composed! I'm impressed in the extreme! Congratulations to both of you fine gentlemen! :)

8.9 vs Carno's 9.1? I will take it! Only 0.2 points behind one of the best on these forums, I will take that any day of the week. Good job to you Carno, I thoroughly enjoyed this myself, we both kept our cool, we didn't cuss each other out, and no insults were thrown whatsoever. Thank you for the positive experience.