I start off by naming two things that could possibly fight, regardless of how unlikely or unrealistic it would be.
The next poster gives their opinion, with (nice creative) reasons, as to who they think would win.
Then they post another two things to battle it out and leave it to the next poster.
etc… it goes on like that until we all die of boredom.
There are no rules on what you can and can’t choose, even if it doesn’t exist, but try to make the two things fairly evenly matched.
Hippo, if the fight goes to water. Those things are vicious when they’re cornered. Or at all. I don’t think a rhino could work up ramming speed immersed in the watering hole.
what would happen is the toaster would try and toast the food processor, and as the plastic started to melt the toaster would get over confident and boastful…
Then once the plastic drops off the food processor, it would strike!
Sharp blades ripping into the toasters filaments and tearing them to shreads!
The baboon has the moves, but the gorilla has the reach. I say the old gorilla eventually tags the baboon in round three, beats it senseless against a tree then hurls it to the tigers in the audience.
The vole would win hands down, the mink would be comatose!
And anyway, you’ve seen the vole cannon, so you know how dangerous those things can be!
**Which would win in a fight?
Dessert topping starts with the high ground, always advantageous… but I think floor wax is too slippery a character for DT to handle. I’m saying FW mops the floor with DT.
Sober, better shape Matthew Perry vs. Heavier, but drug crazed Matthew Perry.
The heavier drug-crazed Matthew Perry, simply because he could take more damage and still stand upright, while all that the drug free Perry would be able to do is fire off one-liners.
Now making their way to the ring:
Steven from the Dell computer ads Vs. The Gecko from the Geico car insurance ads.
