I think 100 men is intimidating. And the Gorillas going to get tired.

Gorillas are not built for endurance like humans are. Humans working together in a coordinated effort to pin it down and hold it until it is too tired to keep fighting will defeat the gorilla every time.

Is the Guardian in the 100?

This. It seems to me, the sheer size and weight of the thing means it's gonna exhaust itself pretty quickly. If the humans just keep running around 50 of em could probably do it.

Once the eyes are eliminated, it's game over.

With proper selection and coordination you wouldn't need anywhere close to 100 men.

Yeah, even if we assume that we have 100 weakling cowards in this fight, all trying to not be "next" and running around - just the act of having to slaughter 100 people who are fighting back when it's their "turn" is going to exhaust the gorilla long before he reaches the last guy.

Are golf carts allowed?

100 men would win against 1 gorilla.

At an average of 225 lbs per man, thats 22,500 pounds of weight. That would crush the gorilla.

However by comparison, 1 seasonal thread beats 100 offseason threads.

The Gorilla would win! The Gorilla will sling his arms, swating the few men that can get close to him, he will move, he will bite, he will rip them up!

Debate, over!

Seems like a better question would be 10 or 20 men against a gorilla. 100 is too many.

So is this taking place at the GB statue, with titty meat leading?

Highly unlikely that 10-20 unarmed men could even come close to beating a silverback. Maybe 30. If they had good leadership and a good plan.

I know how a gorilla can kill a human, but I'm not sure how a human can kill a gorilla. So to me, that's a key bit of information. Reading through the thread, it appears that suffocation is deemed as the weapon of choice, which I guess is possible, but it's a tough ask for the people on the bottom of the pile.

I think the big key here is venue. If it's in the wilderness, the people will very obviously win. Our ancestors were able to kill mammoths, so a gorilla wouldn't be a problem. Sharpened sticks and rocks are very viable weapons when wielded en masse.

Even if it's a desert or other place without sticks and stones, the humans will win based on endurance. We'll do what the bushmen of the Kalahari do, and we'll annoy and chase the gorilla until it collapses.

If it's in a high school gymnasium, that's where it gets tricky. The humans would have to feint at the gorilla a million times to wear it out (the desert strategy) or they'll have to rush it all at once for a suffocation, and you can only get about ten people at a time close to a gorilla. You might win in the end, but you're probably going to lose about 50 of your people in the effort. In the gymnasium, I think a peace treaty is the best approach for both sides.

It’s more of a spacial problem.

If the opponent was a 200ft snake of equal power to the gorilla, the 100 men win easily because each man can apply a large portion of their strength against the enemy.

Likewise, if the opponent was equal to gorilla strength, but in the size of a chihuahua, the men are hosed because only a few men can even touch it simultaneously.

Same concept when only a few men guarding a narrow pass or doorway can effectively deal with many enemy quantities far greater than themselves because the physical space limits the contact.

If all 100 men could dogpile faster than he could throw them off, you got a chance at smothering even if the closest layers just die as meat shields. Gravity doesn’t need contact. The topmost 50 guys are still contributing to fighting force via weight even though they can’t reach the gorilla.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rhonda Rousey