Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers

[LonePredator]

(10-07-2022, 08:34 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 08:15 PM)LonePredator Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 08:04 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 07:37 PM)LonePredator Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 07:22 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 07:17 PM)Kk LonePredator Wrote:

(10-07-2022, 07:03 PM)Pckts Wrote: Here is a comparable male in all departments

*This image is copyright of its original author

213cm in HBL but taken over curves so around 208cm in a straight line.
His chest girth is 140cm *4 cm* larger than Wagdoh 

Shoulder height unknown but it’s safe to say it’s going to be at least as tall as Wagdoh since he wasn’t a very tall Tiger.

This males weight was 546lbs or 247 kgs.

213cm over the curves would mean 200-203 cm in straight which totally adds up with the weight of 247kg.

And like I have already stated, chest girth does not correlate with weight as much as bodylength does and also the fact that Wagdoh was so old his chest girth would have shrunk due to old age.

No it wouldn’t, generally you’ll see anywhere from 2-4” difference between the two. So assuming they both are fairly close in length, Wagdoh is outsized in chest and most likely shoulder. And Branders 600lb Tiger significantly outsized him in every department 

*This image is copyright of its original author

Completely wrong. The straight bodylength is about 0.94-0.955 times the curved bodylength. Your method of ‘subtracting’ 2-4 inches is invalid because the bigger the Tiger, the more you’ll have to subtract and the smaller the Tiger, the less.

Maźak even suggests subtracting 20cm (8 inches) for the largest Tigers so your method of subtracting 2-4 inches is completely wrong.

And even if you subtract 4 inches since this was a large Tiger, it would still mean 203cm in straight line so where did you pull out 208cm from??

And I am saying this the 17th time, chest girth does not have a good enough correlation between with weight and neither does height and Wagdoh was so old his chest would have shrunk anyway.

And the Brander example is invalid since that Tiger was never weighed on a scale.

First off, no two people measure the same which is why you can have different results from the same Tiger depending on who took them. So it doesn’t matter how long or short a Tiger is if the protocol of between the pegs or over the curves is different.

Next is that generally speaking the differences between the two is going to be in the range I specified. What Mazak quoted is too much unless the cat has extreme curvatures or the person taking the measurements is doing it “wrong.” Brander specifically mentions 3-5” for his cats. And this includes the tail which is 1/3 the length of the total body.

And who is saying to take off 4”, certainly not me. Like i said, generally it’s between 2-4” so they’ll be “around” the same length but that male with have a larger chest. So assuming his height is at least as tall he by all accounts will be within the same range as Wagdoh.


Chest girth is one factor, like weight, and height. All show decent correlations to total weight but none will point the whole picture.
Hence the shorter Tiger weighing more than the longer one with the same chest girth.

*This image is copyright of its original author

Lastly back to Brander, his weight estimate is far more valid than 99.9% of the people out there since he’s weighed and measured many cats who were fresh.

Wrong again and thanks for proving my point.

Brander suggests subtracting 3-5 inches. Doesn’t matter if it’s with tail or without tail because tail is ALWAYS measured in straight line even when the total length is measured over the curves because tails have no ‘curves’. 

So 3-5 inches is what you have to subtract from bodylength (excluding tail) as well.

And by this, we can understand that Brander tells us to subtract 3 inches for the small males and 5 inches for the large males and this 213cm male was large so we have to subtract 5 inches which gives us 200cm length in straight line.

And a 200cm Tiger in straight line weighed 247kg which makes total sense. This example of yours once again further proves my point.

Again you don’t know what you’re talking about. When using a soft tape they’ll press against the skin. When you straighten a tail to
Measure the curves you are in a sense “stretching it.” When you lay them down and stamp pegs on either side the tail rests naturally which will
Offer some contraction. 
And Brander never says to subtract 3” for a small male and 5” for a large one. 

Lastly you again make invalid claims like somehow claiming that Tiger shown was 200cm in a straight line. What about the 217cm one that’s sub 500lbs, what’s your excuse for that?

I’m glad you’re starting to get away from your flawed calculations though, even if you go about it in a aggressive way, you’re starting to ask better questions inadvertently.

Like I said, everything you have said till now is devoid of logic. And for your information, I’m still going by those same calculations (the same ‘flawed’ calculations that are based on the same principles used by the likes of Wroe and Christiansen). Maybe those people are idiots and you are the genius.

And I was trying to educate you but for some reason you seem to think I’m ‘asking questions’. And it’s common sense that you would subtract 3 for small ones and 5 for big ones. You have not yet even been able to comprehend this basic logic.

You continue to keep arguing despite being completely wrong about everything you have said so far. I regret trying to educate you because it’s useless. Reply