Since revisiting Giganotosaurus recently, I have a bit of a renewed interest in giant theropod sizes, namely how they compare across taxa. As I already mentioned last time (and as indeed I keep mentioning almost every single time I make a size estimate), maximum size is not a valid standard for comparison. Consider the following example from my other major pet peeve, Otodus megalodon: Here I took size estimates I produced for a sample of over 500 shark teeth, and then randomly drew ten specimens from that sample, and repeated that whole exercise 1000 times (of course my computer did it for me, I’m not crazy). Then, for each of these samples, I computed the mean, maximum and minimum. As you’ll notice, the mean stays essentially the same for the smaller sample, but the maximum and minimum do not; they are very clearly and predictably biased, typically ending up much lower (maximum) or higher (minimum) in the smaller sample. This isn’t some speculation, it is a simple statistical