Tiger (sub)species?

As someone who has (despite being pretty good at mammal ID) extreme difficulty telling tiger (sub) species apart, can anyone give their view on this one?
Labelled Siberian (Amur) - interior Alfred-Brehm house enclosure. To me it looks too \'dark\' and \'short haired\' for Amur, but it is wet so that might be the issue.
From a previous thread, I know that the Tierpark holds Amur, Sumatran & Malayan. I guess one is off-show while the other two are on show and they change the signs?

To my eye, I would have guessed that this photo was of the Malayan, and that the other photo was of the Amur - primarily because the other photo seems a little too pale and thinly striped for a Malayan.

TeaLovingDave said:

To my eye, I would have guessed that this photo was of the Malayan, and that the other photo was of the Amur - primarily because the other photo seems a little too pale and thinly striped for a Malayan.

Click to expand...

I concur...

All three tiger species are on show, at least they were at my visits. The malayan and siberians rotate on of the bigger exhibits (opposite the lions) and the sumatrans are normally in one of the cages on the left side... This is also a malayan for me

OK.....so that probably excludes the Sumatrans.....very helpful....thank you.

Seems, based on appearance, we are all agreed that this photo is Malayan but the one in the link below is Amur.

http://www.zoochat.com/141/tiger-sub-species-350850/

The big issue, however, is that the ones in the exterior enclosure (photo linked above) had cubs. On another thread I have been assured that only the Malayans had cubs in May 2012 (born 2011) and much searching on the internet has confirmed this.

So, as they say, it may just be 'a trick of the light', unless someone can come up with some counter-evidence?

Male amur tiger 'Darius'

As per the other picture.........thank you again for putting me (us?) right.

Not only able to ID the subspecies but also the individual.

Highly impressive!