Who is the "king" of tigers? - Bengal or Amur

[GrizzlyClaws]

(05-04-2015, 01:29 AM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(05-04-2015, 12:36 AM)'Amnon242' Wrote:

(05-04-2015, 12:24 AM)'Pckts' Wrote: Stretched out tigers or one image picked out is not reliable to determine weight. Scaling them agianst human beings is usefull but not scientific. 
Especially when said humans stats are unknown i:e Height, weight etc.

In regards to posting captive body weights, you and I both look at the same table.
If you need me to post it here I will, but its easily found on this forum. That table is verified weights and measurements and most tigers are with in the normal range of their species. 

You also asked why I think they are overweight, 
A couple of reasons,
Most have a less defined muscle definition and have large bellys IMO.
They are robust but not as definied as a wild tiger. While siberians have a thicker coat you can still get a sense of their mass and muscle definition. Lets also not forget that there is like 1 or 2 pictures of him only, no videos or multiple images to get a real idea. One image is not nearly enough to determine a cats true dimensions.

Edit: Perfect example of captive specimen is the lion above
Large belly flap, and lack of muscle definition. I would also bet the female would have a large belly flap as well if she turned to the side, her chest looks droopy.



 

But those photos can give you at least some idea about the size of these animals. Or are those photos completely useless? :)

I know some tables made by Guate and Kingt. Current wild amurs: 190 kg. Older wild amurs: 216 kg. Captive amurs: 220-225 kg (if I remember). Yes, you are right. Captive specimen are basically the same size as older amurs :)

Why do you think that Duisburg tiger (or Baikal or that tiger from tiger oasis) are overweight? Your reasons are abolutely lame in those cases.
 
Lion: this lion has belly flap because its asiatic. I bet you wont be able to recognize the difference between wild and captive lion by photo (and even in persona).


 

"Why do you think that Duisburg tiger (or Baikal or that tiger from tiger oasis) are overweight? Your reasons are abolutely lame in those cases"
I never stated anyting about specific tigers just captive tigers in general.
But Baikal looks to be overweight, not obese but he diffenitly doesn't have the definition and has a bit of a large stomach. He's a massive tiger no matter how you slice it, i'm not taking that away from him but his sized is matched by a wild specimen.

I guarantee I can tell the difference between wild and captive lions, I have seen 100s of images and videos of both, they are usually very easy to distinguish. (most of the time, there are a few captive specimens that are in fine health) But very few, the closest "captive lions" to look like wild are Kevin Richardsons and only because his actually live in the "wild" they are just fenced in.

Your claim of the Lion with the belly flap being asiatic is also unfounded, unless you see the stud book you have no idea and most captive lions and tigers are far from pure bred. Especially ones in a place like that where they let different species of cat live together. I:E Lions and tigers...
If a cat is pure bred they are used to breed with other pure bred cats to in a sanctuary type setting. 
Even Asiatic lions have belly flaps, yes, but nothing close to that droopy and same with tigers. 

If you took historic accounts of Siberians as well, their average weight would jump and be higher than that in captivity as well, but obviously its highly debatable when using older hunting records.

 

 

Baikal is not overweighed, he only lacks the muscular appearance of the wild tiger because he is a captive tiger.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply