use of tools. That chimp would charge after the human, but very likely find himself having been led into the middle of a circle of human hunters, armed with some very sharp and stout sticks -- jabbing spears. Sheer numbers and tools make up the difference.
Once wounded and trying to escape, an animal would have to contend with a very great, unmatched strength of humans which we seldom acknowledge. Since humans use only two limbs for locomotion, they consume less energy in doing it than creatures who must use four limbs. Aided by our specially evolved hips, legs and joints, we in a hunting group can go on and on and on, trotting, fast walking, and pursue a prey for miles and miles. It might think it has finally got rid of that noisy confusing bunch of pursuers, but -- an hour later -- lo and behold, there they are again, still coming, banging those sticks together, and even waving torches. Time to run again.
Sooner or later, we human hunter groups are going to run that exhausted creature down and get him, and that's a technique used within living memory in Africa to hunt even lions.
We humans are prodigious distance consumers, as our migrations have shown. As individuals, we might not be strong (though many lions have misjudged that in facing a Masai with a spear on his manhood hunt). We might not be fast for short spurts. But we tend to bunch together in very dangerous groups, with very dangerous weapons, and even fire to use when it's to our advantage. But we're the greatest threat to all, including other humans, when we get a prey on the run and start our group marathon trot in pursuit -- 20 miles a day easily. We isolate the one we want, start our hunting group after it and simply wear it down (or run it over a butte or cliff, as Indians did with buffalo, or up a dead end gulley toward which we've been herding it all along).
Frankly, I think by the time we had developed our clan hunting techniques, we were probably a fairly fearsome opponent to face.
= new reply since forum marked as read