Freak Specimens

[Shadow]

(12-01-2019, 11:47 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(12-01-2019, 11:08 PM)Shadow Wrote:

(12-01-2019, 10:52 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(12-01-2019, 10:26 PM)Shadow Wrote:

(12-01-2019, 09:22 PM)Pckts Wrote: I'm not talking about weight, I'm talking about physique and like @Apollo said, wild cats are filled to the brim with muscle, a 250kg wild cat is much more impressive than a 250kg captive cat,you can see it in their definition, muscle mass and vascularity.

I was and am talking about overall size and weight. And I don´t see there major differences between captive and wild. Biggest individuals look like to be quite same sized and weights are also close to each others when animals look fit.

Overall size, Wild cats are far more impressive. They're way more muscle dense, body frame is similar although Tigers were significantly larger in frame and robustness, Wild Lions are also larger in frame and robustness but I've seen a Taller cat in captivity than I have in the wild, but that was a S. African Lion compared to a E. African wild Lion. 
But in terms of impressive specimens, I've never seen anything close in captivity that compares to their wild counterparts, that goes for smaller cats as well. 

You dont see cats like these in captivity for the most part.

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

Nice looking animals, but doesn´t change the way I see this. I said, that there can be some difference, but I see no reason to think, that major differences. Well, of course 20 kg is a lot of muscle if wild animal with same shoulder height and body length has that much more. It also can look a lot more impressive when a little less fat and muscles can be seen better. 

But it doesn´t change for instance it, that lion Aslan is one of the biggest known lions ever, when we talk about fit looking lions and weighed properly. There is only one wild lion known to have weighed more than him and that lion was... was it 272 or 273 kg(?).

What comes to Caesar, there is only speculation. It could have been close to 300 kg or maybe "just" 250 kg. If someone gets some confirmed information one day it will be very interesting to see. 

I am not debating here really about this matter, but giving more reasoning why I see this matter how I do. Looking more ripped doesn´t mean automatically, that bigger or weighing more.

I never said they were heavier,  some captive cats have large weights but they carry far more fat. You can easily see it in their belly folds, captive lions have them often and almost never have them in the wild outside of the Gir and Tigers belly folds are usually low hanging and sway while in the wild their folds are tight and close to their body.

Aslan being 250kg and in fairly good shape is a large lion but his weight has still been surpassed in the wild with more fit Lions as well. You can guarantee that a Lion like Earless would most likely be in the 280kg category as well.

I would love to see one day a verified lion weighing 280 kg or more. It would be very interesting to compare such a lion with Aslan and some other known big captive lions. Any of this doesn´t change really how I see this. Aslan is already that big lion and fit looking, that there simply aren´t many that big lions, captive or wild. It can´t be forgotten, that in weighings in wild already 250 kg is exceptional weight. 

It´s the same with tigers, not too many are over that weight, some exceptional individuals have been, but many really good looking tigers are less.

I hope, that this cleared more why I think as I think. I compare verified weights and what can be seen in photos/videos. I just don´t see there major differences even though wild ones are more ripped. Overall animals are still the same naturally, they grow up smaller and bigger in captivity and in wild and differences between biggest, when looking at weights aren´t anything extraordinary when obese animals are excluded. Reply