Add a Comment1743 comments
Average Guess (244 Votes)
6ft 6.92in (200.4cm)
6ft 6.92in (200.4cm)
aaronious said on 24/Feb/11
PROOF that sid is and has always been a half inch taller than undertaker, putting sid at 6'8":
Click Here
PROOF that sid is and has always been a half inch taller than undertaker, putting sid at 6'8":
Click Here
aaronious said on 24/Feb/11
sid looks a full 12" taller than mamun in BOTh pics. sid has an enormous head, 10+"
why you still hating on Sid rob? in EVERY interview where he stands toe to toe with taker, both in the old "mark callus" days and now, sid ALWAYS has .5" on taker, every friggin time.
sid is a legit 6'9"
if anyone ever watched family fued when they had the wcw on there, sid stood next to nash and was 1 inch shorter, there was no mistaking it.. sid isn't 6'7", he's 6'8"
he had almost 2" on bryan adams, even though bryan had a footwear advantage
sid looks a full 12" taller than mamun in BOTh pics. sid has an enormous head, 10+"
why you still hating on Sid rob? in EVERY interview where he stands toe to toe with taker, both in the old "mark callus" days and now, sid ALWAYS has .5" on taker, every friggin time.
sid is a legit 6'9"
if anyone ever watched family fued when they had the wcw on there, sid stood next to nash and was 1 inch shorter, there was no mistaking it.. sid isn't 6'7", he's 6'8"
he had almost 2" on bryan adams, even though bryan had a footwear advantage
Tuga said on 22/Feb/11
Vegas says on 13/Feb/11
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
Well, if sid and roberts were using isis heels it wouldn´t look good for isis either ;)
Vegas says on 13/Feb/11
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
Well, if sid and roberts were using isis heels it wouldn´t look good for isis either ;)
Anonymous said on 21/Feb/11
How tall is Bill Apter?
How tall is Bill Apter?
NCL said on 21/Feb/11
NeNa says on 19/Feb/11
NCL says on 16/Feb/11
woops! mean COULD have been wearing heels :>)
I don´t know, if I got you right. At 0:05 you can see her heels and they are high! Nevertheless, I don´t doubt her 6'9" either.
Yeah what I meant to say was that she wears heels often in addition to being a legit 6'9"
NeNa says on 19/Feb/11
NCL says on 16/Feb/11
woops! mean COULD have been wearing heels :>)
I don´t know, if I got you right. At 0:05 you can see her heels and they are high! Nevertheless, I don´t doubt her 6'9" either.
Yeah what I meant to say was that she wears heels often in addition to being a legit 6'9"
NeNa said on 19/Feb/11
NCL says on 16/Feb/11
woops! mean COULD have been wearing heels :>)
I don´t know, if I got you right. At 0:05 you can see her heels and they are high! Nevertheless, I don´t doubt her 6'9" either.
NCL says on 16/Feb/11
woops! mean COULD have been wearing heels :>)
I don´t know, if I got you right. At 0:05 you can see her heels and they are high! Nevertheless, I don´t doubt her 6'9" either.
NCL said on 16/Feb/11
NCL says on 14/Feb/11
Vegas says on 13/Feb/11
bill apter and sid Click Here
apter jake roberts Click Here
apter with 6'9 billed isis Click Here
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
I think it's possible she couldn't have been wearing heels. Most of the pictures of her out of the ring I've seen she's wearing heels. Just put her name in google images Click Here
I'm sure she's certainly a legit 6'9" tho
woops! mean COULD have been wearing heels :>)
NCL says on 14/Feb/11
Vegas says on 13/Feb/11
bill apter and sid Click Here
apter jake roberts Click Here
apter with 6'9 billed isis Click Here
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
I think it's possible she couldn't have been wearing heels. Most of the pictures of her out of the ring I've seen she's wearing heels. Just put her name in google images Click Here
I'm sure she's certainly a legit 6'9" tho
woops! mean COULD have been wearing heels :>)
NCL said on 14/Feb/11
Vegas says on 13/Feb/11
bill apter and sid Click Here
apter jake roberts Click Here
apter with 6'9 billed isis Click Here
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
I think it's possible she couldn't have been wearing heels. Most of the pictures of her out of the ring I've seen she's wearing heels. Just put her name in google images Click Here
I'm sure she's certainly a legit 6'9" tho
Vegas says on 13/Feb/11
bill apter and sid Click Here
apter jake roberts Click Here
apter with 6'9 billed isis Click Here
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
I think it's possible she couldn't have been wearing heels. Most of the pictures of her out of the ring I've seen she's wearing heels. Just put her name in google images Click Here
I'm sure she's certainly a legit 6'9" tho
Vegas said on 13/Feb/11
bill apter and sid Click Here
apter jake roberts Click Here
apter with 6'9 billed isis Click Here
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
bill apter and sid Click Here
apter jake roberts Click Here
apter with 6'9 billed isis Click Here
i think if roberts or sid stood next to isis in those heels it wouldn't look good for either
Stone said on 12/Feb/11
Sid is absolute MINIMUM of 6'6"
Sid is absolute MINIMUM of 6'6"
NCL said on 11/Feb/11
Tuga says on 10/Feb/11
NCL says on 9/Feb/11
This may be the photo you're referring to but if it is to be fair 'Taker does have the angle advantage Click Here
It wasn´t a photo, it was a video from the wwe website. That photo is obviously favoring taker.
Ooh Ok I know what you're talking about now. If I find it I'll post it, may be on the WWE site someplace.
Tuga says on 10/Feb/11
NCL says on 9/Feb/11
This may be the photo you're referring to but if it is to be fair 'Taker does have the angle advantage Click Here
It wasn´t a photo, it was a video from the wwe website. That photo is obviously favoring taker.
Ooh Ok I know what you're talking about now. If I find it I'll post it, may be on the WWE site someplace.
Tuga said on 10/Feb/11
NCL says on 9/Feb/11
This may be the photo you're referring to but if it is to be fair 'Taker does have the angle advantage Click Here
It wasn´t a photo, it was a video from the wwe website. That photo is obviously favoring taker.
NCL says on 9/Feb/11
This may be the photo you're referring to but if it is to be fair 'Taker does have the angle advantage Click Here
It wasn´t a photo, it was a video from the wwe website. That photo is obviously favoring taker.
NCL said on 9/Feb/11
Tuga says on 8/Feb/11
JT says on 8/Feb/11
Tuga, not sure why Michael drew the line so far above Taker's head. Look at the distance between Taker's eyes and the top line - Taker has a pointy head but it's not deformed. It's probably more like this Click Here Taker is obviously closer to the camera and has footwear every bit as large as Sid's, if not larger.
Yes JT, that was my point that they both have similar footware, like I said taker´s foot is closer to the camera making his boots look bigger.
Since you´re here longer than me do you remember the video I posted from the wwe website with a different angle from their wm13 staredown? It was clear again by that taker is the taller man, not by much but still...
This may be the photo you're referring to but if it is to be fair 'Taker does have the angle advantage Click Here
Tuga says on 8/Feb/11
JT says on 8/Feb/11
Tuga, not sure why Michael drew the line so far above Taker's head. Look at the distance between Taker's eyes and the top line - Taker has a pointy head but it's not deformed. It's probably more like this Click Here Taker is obviously closer to the camera and has footwear every bit as large as Sid's, if not larger.
Yes JT, that was my point that they both have similar footware, like I said taker´s foot is closer to the camera making his boots look bigger.
Since you´re here longer than me do you remember the video I posted from the wwe website with a different angle from their wm13 staredown? It was clear again by that taker is the taller man, not by much but still...
This may be the photo you're referring to but if it is to be fair 'Taker does have the angle advantage Click Here
Tuga said on 8/Feb/11
JT says on 8/Feb/11
Tuga, not sure why Michael drew the line so far above Taker’s head. Look at the distance between Taker's eyes and the top line - Taker has a pointy head but it's not deformed. It’s probably more like this Click Here Taker is obviously closer to the camera and has footwear every bit as large as Sid’s, if not larger.
Yes JT, that was my point that they both have similar footware, like I said taker´s foot is closer to the camera making his boots look bigger.
Since you´re here longer than me do you remember the video I posted from the wwe website with a different angle from their wm13 staredown? It was clear again by that taker is the taller man, not by much but still...
JT says on 8/Feb/11
Tuga, not sure why Michael drew the line so far above Taker’s head. Look at the distance between Taker's eyes and the top line - Taker has a pointy head but it's not deformed. It’s probably more like this Click Here Taker is obviously closer to the camera and has footwear every bit as large as Sid’s, if not larger.
Yes JT, that was my point that they both have similar footware, like I said taker´s foot is closer to the camera making his boots look bigger.
Since you´re here longer than me do you remember the video I posted from the wwe website with a different angle from their wm13 staredown? It was clear again by that taker is the taller man, not by much but still...
JT said on 8/Feb/11
Tuga, not sure why Michael drew the line so far above Taker's head. Look at the distance between Taker's eyes and the top line - Taker has a pointy head but it's not deformed. It's probably more like this Click Here Taker is obviously closer to the camera and has footwear every bit as large as Sid's, if not larger.
Tuga, not sure why Michael drew the line so far above Taker's head. Look at the distance between Taker's eyes and the top line - Taker has a pointy head but it's not deformed. It's probably more like this Click Here Taker is obviously closer to the camera and has footwear every bit as large as Sid's, if not larger.
Tuga said on 8/Feb/11
Vegas says on 7/Feb/11
why because its on video, second both sid and taker are in the same flat boots in that memphis video, third because taker has short hair, that photo which has been discussed many times is
Vegas, what about all the other videos of their staredowns in the middle of the ring? For example the one from wrestlemania where we can even see footware, its much better than the masked sid one...
Besides taker stacks up better to nash than sid ever did, in 2002 he was clearly taller next to hogan than sid ever was and I mention this because I know you don´t think hogan lost almost any height by that time, these are just examples, but still if you wan´t a 6'7 taker you´ll still have to explain why he´s 3 inches taller than 6'5 jbl or again looks 6'8 next to khali.
On the matter of footware, its funny how peolpe tought he wore big boots in his ministry days but actually it was probably his smallest footware in wwe/f.
Vegas says on 7/Feb/11
why because its on video, second both sid and taker are in the same flat boots in that memphis video, third because taker has short hair, that photo which has been discussed many times is
Vegas, what about all the other videos of their staredowns in the middle of the ring? For example the one from wrestlemania where we can even see footware, its much better than the masked sid one...
Besides taker stacks up better to nash than sid ever did, in 2002 he was clearly taller next to hogan than sid ever was and I mention this because I know you don´t think hogan lost almost any height by that time, these are just examples, but still if you wan´t a 6'7 taker you´ll still have to explain why he´s 3 inches taller than 6'5 jbl or again looks 6'8 next to khali.
On the matter of footware, its funny how peolpe tought he wore big boots in his ministry days but actually it was probably his smallest footware in wwe/f.
NCL said on 7/Feb/11
Red, appreciate the pic, but I just do not agree. That's an EXTREME close up, anything would look large in that. And even if it was true, Sid's boots in the WWF were still larger IMO. Tell ya what, if you can/have time, find a pic of Sid's boot from 1991ish and do that extreme close up, you'll see what I mean. A pic of Kane's boots would work too. If that's an inch and a half than what are Kane's munster boots? 4"?
And I said from his debut TO 94, I didn't say he debuted in 94. I meant that he wore the same boots from his debut until about 1994 (when he debuted the purple gloves and all that)
Red, appreciate the pic, but I just do not agree. That's an EXTREME close up, anything would look large in that. And even if it was true, Sid's boots in the WWF were still larger IMO. Tell ya what, if you can/have time, find a pic of Sid's boot from 1991ish and do that extreme close up, you'll see what I mean. A pic of Kane's boots would work too. If that's an inch and a half than what are Kane's munster boots? 4"?
And I said from his debut TO 94, I didn't say he debuted in 94. I meant that he wore the same boots from his debut until about 1994 (when he debuted the purple gloves and all that)
Vegas said on 7/Feb/11
why because its on video, second both sid and taker are in the same flat boots in that memphis video, third because taker has short hair, that photo which has been discussed many times is taken from an angle favouring taker, the cameraman is to the right of taker, there is no way sids eyeline is half an inch higher but he still comes out 1 inch shorter than taker, sorry but no, at most takers forehead is half an inch longer than sids
why because its on video, second both sid and taker are in the same flat boots in that memphis video, third because taker has short hair, that photo which has been discussed many times is taken from an angle favouring taker, the cameraman is to the right of taker, there is no way sids eyeline is half an inch higher but he still comes out 1 inch shorter than taker, sorry but no, at most takers forehead is half an inch longer than sids
d wade said on 7/Feb/11
i think the Undertaker is a half inch taller than sid so 6,7 1/2 for Undertaker and 6,7 for sid is right and Kane is taller than the Undertaker by 1/4 or 1/2 so Kane is close to 6,8.
i think the Undertaker is a half inch taller than sid so 6,7 1/2 for Undertaker and 6,7 for sid is right and Kane is taller than the Undertaker by 1/4 or 1/2 so Kane is close to 6,8.
Tuga said on 7/Feb/11
Click Here
IMO Taker is no doubt taller than sid, Vegas how can you just pick up a masked sid trying to look as tall as possible next to taker and just close the discussion?
There are loads of staredowns between the 2 and taker comes up taller just about every time, look again at the pic I posted, takers foot is closer to the camera, even if taker´s sole was bigger it would be so minimal it doesn´t compensate the difference between them, which is already small.
Click Here
IMO Taker is no doubt taller than sid, Vegas how can you just pick up a masked sid trying to look as tall as possible next to taker and just close the discussion?
There are loads of staredowns between the 2 and taker comes up taller just about every time, look again at the pic I posted, takers foot is closer to the camera, even if taker´s sole was bigger it would be so minimal it doesn´t compensate the difference between them, which is already small.
Red said on 6/Feb/11
NCL says on 3/Feb/11
What?? If you really want to go the footwear argument, then look at UT's shoes from the his debut to about 94, they're practically flat, maybe .5" give tops Click Here If that's not a enough, just watch any match from that time period, including his staredowns with Sid. No way a lift could be in that.
???94 Takers Debut was in november 1990 and here are his boots Click Here
They look more like 1.5" than 0.5" and that´s the reason why he looked 1 inch taller than Sid in WWF.
NCL says on 3/Feb/11
What?? If you really want to go the footwear argument, then look at UT's shoes from the his debut to about 94, they're practically flat, maybe .5" give tops Click Here If that's not a enough, just watch any match from that time period, including his staredowns with Sid. No way a lift could be in that.
???94 Takers Debut was in november 1990 and here are his boots Click Here
They look more like 1.5" than 0.5" and that´s the reason why he looked 1 inch taller than Sid in WWF.
Vegas said on 6/Feb/11
well sid sure didn't look 1 inch shorter than taker in that memphis video from 88-89 danimal, good to see you ignore vital evidence again though, any chance taker had of being taller than sid went out the window with that video, taker, sid and jacobs would all be the same height, taker and jacobs are still the same height today
hogan should not be mentioned alongside sid/kane etc kane etc in terms of height, it should be someone like spivey who measured up far better next to sid and taker than hogan ever did, hogans in the bracket alongside guys like jeep swenson, scott hall and this guy Seiji Sakaguchi Click Here
well sid sure didn't look 1 inch shorter than taker in that memphis video from 88-89 danimal, good to see you ignore vital evidence again though, any chance taker had of being taller than sid went out the window with that video, taker, sid and jacobs would all be the same height, taker and jacobs are still the same height today
hogan should not be mentioned alongside sid/kane etc kane etc in terms of height, it should be someone like spivey who measured up far better next to sid and taker than hogan ever did, hogans in the bracket alongside guys like jeep swenson, scott hall and this guy Seiji Sakaguchi Click Here
Danimal said on 5/Feb/11
Of Taker, Sid and Kane, Taker was the tallest of the 3 men. He was the closes to a legit 6'8" (at his PEAK). Kane was a tad shorter (6'7") and Sid perhaps a tad shorter than Kane (also around 6'7").. I think Studd would have stood a fraction under Sid's height and then it would have been Hogan (PEAK Hogan)... Throw in One Man Gang and Earthquake and you'd have an interesting line up...
Of Taker, Sid and Kane, Taker was the tallest of the 3 men. He was the closes to a legit 6'8" (at his PEAK). Kane was a tad shorter (6'7") and Sid perhaps a tad shorter than Kane (also around 6'7").. I think Studd would have stood a fraction under Sid's height and then it would have been Hogan (PEAK Hogan)... Throw in One Man Gang and Earthquake and you'd have an interesting line up...
Mike said on 2/Feb/11
The WWF led me to belive he was 6 ft 9
The WWF led me to belive he was 6 ft 9
FormlessOne said on 31/Jan/11
I don´t know if this was posted before. Here he is described as 6´7" and 290 lbs. Click Here Smaller and lighter than later in his career.
I don´t know if this was posted before. Here he is described as 6´7" and 290 lbs. Click Here Smaller and lighter than later in his career.
Anonymous said on 29/Jan/11
His peak height is 199-200 cms
His peak height is 199-200 cms
Red said on 23/Jan/11
Supermanfan380 says on 21/Jan/11
I remember at WM13 UT had on those type of boots that seemed to be hiding a lift. To make them not look like complete wedge shaped feet it looked like the toe area was even extended.
That´s exactly what I thought, Taker is much taller than in the early 97 staredowns. He had close to an inch on Sid at WM 13, noway he was that much taller in 1989 with equal footwear.
Supermanfan380 says on 21/Jan/11
I remember at WM13 UT had on those type of boots that seemed to be hiding a lift. To make them not look like complete wedge shaped feet it looked like the toe area was even extended.
That´s exactly what I thought, Taker is much taller than in the early 97 staredowns. He had close to an inch on Sid at WM 13, noway he was that much taller in 1989 with equal footwear.
Anom said on 12/Jan/11
Sid, Taker, and Kane were all really close in height. Taker and Kane were around 6'8", Sid a bit shorter at about 6'7.25"-6'7.5" peak. Nash had them by about what looked like 1.5 to 2 inches, 6'9"-6'10".
Sid, Taker, and Kane were all really close in height. Taker and Kane were around 6'8", Sid a bit shorter at about 6'7.25"-6'7.5" peak. Nash had them by about what looked like 1.5 to 2 inches, 6'9"-6'10".
NCL said on 24/Dec/10
Everyone's been having a field day on the Undertaker page with the new Sid/UT video, might as well share it here:
Click Here
Click Here (credit to mikev10)
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
To be even more fair (and to stir the pot a bit, why not?), the only other time I can recall Sid looking taller than 'Taker is in this Interview (see from 4:17 and on - I think 3:31 is the best spot) Click Here it's hard to tell here too tho
My guess TOPS 'Taker is taller by .5", it could even be .25". It's definitely possible they could be the same height but I don't think so because too many staredowns are in 'Taker's favor
Everyone's been having a field day on the Undertaker page with the new Sid/UT video, might as well share it here:
Click Here
Click Here (credit to mikev10)
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
To be even more fair (and to stir the pot a bit, why not?), the only other time I can recall Sid looking taller than 'Taker is in this Interview (see from 4:17 and on - I think 3:31 is the best spot) Click Here it's hard to tell here too tho
My guess TOPS 'Taker is taller by .5", it could even be .25". It's definitely possible they could be the same height but I don't think so because too many staredowns are in 'Taker's favor
Clay said on 16/Dec/10
James says on 15/Dec/10
Hogans is 6'3 flat today not 6'2.
+1
James says on 15/Dec/10
Hogans is 6'3 flat today not 6'2.
+1
James said on 15/Dec/10
Hogans is 6'3 flat today not 6'2.
Hogans is 6'3 flat today not 6'2.
Clay said on 11/Dec/10
Danimal says on 4/Aug/10
Now it's time for Rob to look at recent evidence and downgrade Hogan's current height.
What ''evidence''. Hogan at 6'2'' even today in his late 50's is bull. The only way you justify your Hogan is 6'2 theories is the same way you try to spin the crazy ''Undertaker is 6'6-6'6.5 today'' by pointing to footwear.
Danimal says on 4/Aug/10
Now it's time for Rob to look at recent evidence and downgrade Hogan's current height.
What ''evidence''. Hogan at 6'2'' even today in his late 50's is bull. The only way you justify your Hogan is 6'2 theories is the same way you try to spin the crazy ''Undertaker is 6'6-6'6.5 today'' by pointing to footwear.
Clay said on 6/Dec/10
You have been in the presence of some impressive human beings Mamun from Sid, KAne, and Kevin NAsh to Naseer Soomro and Alam Channa.
Next up is shots with Big SHow and Giant Khali!
You have been in the presence of some impressive human beings Mamun from Sid, KAne, and Kevin NAsh to Naseer Soomro and Alam Channa.
Next up is shots with Big SHow and Giant Khali!
Mamun said on 4/Dec/10
like I had always said SID was just a Gigantic of a man !
Regards
SUPERMUN
like I had always said SID was just a Gigantic of a man !
Regards
SUPERMUN
Clay said on 3/Dec/10
My friend Mamun and uncle Bashir looks at least 6'2'' next to Bruce WIllis. Sid is a mountain of a man!
My friend Mamun and uncle Bashir looks at least 6'2'' next to Bruce WIllis. Sid is a mountain of a man!
James said on 2/Dec/10
LOL and uncle Bashir is 6'2.
Mamun how big do you think sid would look next to bruce willis given that your cousin towered ove bruce.
LOL and uncle Bashir is 6'2.
Mamun how big do you think sid would look next to bruce willis given that your cousin towered ove bruce.
linke said on 1/Dec/10
mamun,is that Uncle bashir in red shirt?Sid does look much taller than him.
mamun,is that Uncle bashir in red shirt?Sid does look much taller than him.
Vegas said on 6/Nov/10
full video of that sid and adams staredown Click Here
adams and undertaker 1993 Click Here
adams was also taller than hogan in wcw
full video of that sid and adams staredown Click Here
adams and undertaker 1993 Click Here
adams was also taller than hogan in wcw
d wade said on 3/Nov/10
sid is without a doubt 6,7 or 6,7 1/2 he was half inch small than the undertaker.
sid is without a doubt 6,7 or 6,7 1/2 he was half inch small than the undertaker.
Stone said on 1/Nov/10
Sid was and probably is still a solid 6'7" he is at least 2 inches then Hulk Hogan is .
Sid was and probably is still a solid 6'7" he is at least 2 inches then Hulk Hogan is .
TELLEM said on 1/Jul/09
i've seen that vid. its somewhere on youtube. matter fec, i posted it on here on the taker page. he said 6'8,6'9. from the "this is my yard" dvd when talking about the beginning of his wrestling career. 6'8 was the most.
i've seen that vid. its somewhere on youtube. matter fec, i posted it on here on the taker page. he said 6'8,6'9. from the "this is my yard" dvd when talking about the beginning of his wrestling career. 6'8 was the most.
Anonymous said on 1/Jul/09
Danimal says on 26/Jun/09
why do you upgrade EVERYBODY??? Taker was never over 6'8". He stated that height for himself. Sid was 6'7".
He stated in an interview "6'8, 6'9". Seem to be implying he was in between. I will find the link and post it here later.
Danimal says on 26/Jun/09
why do you upgrade EVERYBODY??? Taker was never over 6'8". He stated that height for himself. Sid was 6'7".
He stated in an interview "6'8, 6'9". Seem to be implying he was in between. I will find the link and post it here later.
TexasWrestling said on 27/Jun/09
Jake Roberts was 6'5.5" prime
John Layfield was 6'6" prime
Jake Roberts was 6'5.5" prime
John Layfield was 6'6" prime
general93 said on 27/Jun/09
taker also said he is now 6'9" so what i gave him 6'8" anyway danimal.i dont upgrade anyone thats the height i belive to be write in my own estimation.ive seen these wrestlers myself and im 6'2" 270lbs.
taker also said he is now 6'9" so what i gave him 6'8" anyway danimal.i dont upgrade anyone thats the height i belive to be write in my own estimation.ive seen these wrestlers myself and im 6'2" 270lbs.
Danimal said on 26/Jun/09
general93 says on 25/Jun/09
taker was 6'9" when he fought sid in 1992 so id say sid was 6'8-.5" taker lost an inch of height he is 6'8" today.6'10" kevin nash had 2" on him and he had about 2" on then 6'6" hogan.sorry but 6'6.5" is definetly wrong for sid.
why do you upgrade EVERYBODY??? Taker was never over 6'8". He stated that height for himself. Sid was 6'7".
general93 says on 25/Jun/09
taker was 6'9" when he fought sid in 1992 so id say sid was 6'8-.5" taker lost an inch of height he is 6'8" today.6'10" kevin nash had 2" on him and he had about 2" on then 6'6" hogan.sorry but 6'6.5" is definetly wrong for sid.
why do you upgrade EVERYBODY??? Taker was never over 6'8". He stated that height for himself. Sid was 6'7".
Clay said on 25/Jun/09
Sid deserves at least a nudge up to 6'7''.
Sid deserves at least a nudge up to 6'7''.
general93 said on 25/Jun/09
taker was 6'9" when he fought sid in 1992 so id say sid was 6'8-.5" taker lost an inch of height he is 6'8" today.6'10" kevin nash had 2" on him and he had about 2" on then 6'6" hogan.sorry but 6'6.5" is definetly wrong for sid.
taker was 6'9" when he fought sid in 1992 so id say sid was 6'8-.5" taker lost an inch of height he is 6'8" today.6'10" kevin nash had 2" on him and he had about 2" on then 6'6" hogan.sorry but 6'6.5" is definetly wrong for sid.
aarod said on 23/Jun/09
good call on jake's heels
as to the picture, i think you gusy are nuts..Sid looks the same height as 6'8.5" tyler mane next to mamun, and even taller in the second picture
good call on jake's heels
as to the picture, i think you gusy are nuts..Sid looks the same height as 6'8.5" tyler mane next to mamun, and even taller in the second picture
Mamun said on 8/Jun/09
I heard there was going to be and indie wreslting match with Sid on june 13 !
The drug test thing was way back in 2008 ! Let's wait, pray and see what will
happen ?
Regards
Mamun
I heard there was going to be and indie wreslting match with Sid on june 13 !
The drug test thing was way back in 2008 ! Let's wait, pray and see what will
happen ?
Regards
Mamun
sid said on 6/Jun/09
mamum sid aint coming back.. wwe wanted to hire him back.he wouldnt take a drug test..so they didnt waste there time with him.
mamum sid aint coming back.. wwe wanted to hire him back.he wouldnt take a drug test..so they didnt waste there time with him.
Danimal said on 5/Jun/09
so, electric shock and shock of electric are friends? You guys even chose similar names and both like height?
Rob, are these 2 guys the same person?
so, electric shock and shock of electric are friends? You guys even chose similar names and both like height?
Rob, are these 2 guys the same person?
i-Clarke-93 said on 4/Jun/09
What I don't get is why Jake was only billed at 6'5 by by the WWE when they could have easily have given him 6'7 considering how well he stacked up with The Undertaker.
What I don't get is why Jake was only billed at 6'5 by by the WWE when they could have easily have given him 6'7 considering how well he stacked up with The Undertaker.
Electric Shock said on 2/Jun/09
aarod Jake had huge boots.
Click Here
Jake in the ring frequently came out taller than Hogan who he was actually half an inch to an inch shorter than. His boots were MASSIVE. probably 1.75" heels. They were as big as anything Kane ever wore.
Jake is 6'5", so 6'5"+ 1.75" boots= 6'6.75"
Undertaker is 6'8.25" + 0.5" boots= 6'8.75"
or a perceived 2 inches.
aarod Jake had huge boots.
Click Here
Jake in the ring frequently came out taller than Hogan who he was actually half an inch to an inch shorter than. His boots were MASSIVE. probably 1.75" heels. They were as big as anything Kane ever wore.
Jake is 6'5", so 6'5"+ 1.75" boots= 6'6.75"
Undertaker is 6'8.25" + 0.5" boots= 6'8.75"
or a perceived 2 inches.
Electric Shock said on 1/Jun/09
I'm not even a big Taker fan. My friend is who also posts under a similar name, but the facts are the facts. Taker is no less than an inch taller than Sid.
Here's an exercise Red; if you have a tape measurer, stand in a kind of hunch, head forward, shoulders bent, and see how you measure. Now, go ram rod straight, and see how much taller you are.
Sid ALWAYS stood ramrod straight, in addition to the slight boot advantage. Taker almost always with about a 15 degree hunch at the neck. Taker still comes out a half an inch or more taller with this. In the few instances Taker stood straight up next to Sid, like the picture I posted, he was at least an inch taller than Sid.
in boots, Undertaker is 6'9" and Sid is 6'8", maybe 6'8.25". barefoot, Taker is 6'8.25", and Sid is 6'7".
I'm not even a big Taker fan. My friend is who also posts under a similar name, but the facts are the facts. Taker is no less than an inch taller than Sid.
Here's an exercise Red; if you have a tape measurer, stand in a kind of hunch, head forward, shoulders bent, and see how you measure. Now, go ram rod straight, and see how much taller you are.
Sid ALWAYS stood ramrod straight, in addition to the slight boot advantage. Taker almost always with about a 15 degree hunch at the neck. Taker still comes out a half an inch or more taller with this. In the few instances Taker stood straight up next to Sid, like the picture I posted, he was at least an inch taller than Sid.
in boots, Undertaker is 6'9" and Sid is 6'8", maybe 6'8.25". barefoot, Taker is 6'8.25", and Sid is 6'7".
Red said on 31/May/09
E-Shock, like vegas said - there
E-Shock, like vegas said - there
Electric Shock said on 31/May/09
Taker had WELL over an inch on Sid. I already posted the proof. If you're not buying it, than you're blinded by bias.
Taker had WELL over an inch on Sid. I already posted the proof. If you're not buying it, than you're blinded by bias.
aarod said on 29/May/09
6'5"-6'6" jake roberts, i dont knwo exactly hwo tall he is, and undertaker, no more than 2 inches between them..
Click Here
6'5"-6'6" jake roberts, i dont knwo exactly hwo tall he is, and undertaker, no more than 2 inches between them..
Click Here
aarod said on 29/May/09
6'5"-6'6" jake roberts, i dont knwo exactly hwo tall he is, and undertaker, no more than 2 inches between them..
6'5"-6'6" jake roberts, i dont knwo exactly hwo tall he is, and undertaker, no more than 2 inches between them..
Vegas said on 29/May/09
Clay says on 28/May/09
They all hit the tanning salon frequently.
not them all, here is my fellow countryman who doesn't need any of that tanning rubbish :) Click Here
Clay says on 28/May/09
They all hit the tanning salon frequently.
not them all, here is my fellow countryman who doesn't need any of that tanning rubbish :) Click Here
Clay said on 28/May/09
They all hit the tanning salon frequently.
They all hit the tanning salon frequently.
Da Man said on 28/May/09
Taker had 1/2" max on Sid.
Taker had 1/2" max on Sid.
Cobra said on 28/May/09
I believe that when I see it, Mamun, cause that`s what they said a year ago.
He is still in great shape, but he hit the tanning salon to much back then.
It`s not good for your skin, but you see that later first.
I believe that when I see it, Mamun, cause that`s what they said a year ago.
He is still in great shape, but he hit the tanning salon to much back then.
It`s not good for your skin, but you see that later first.
Mamun said on 28/May/09
Guess What guys ????????????? SID is coming Back !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Regards
Supermun
Guess What guys ????????????? SID is coming Back !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Regards
Supermun
Vegas said on 27/May/09
based on video evidence (of which there is quite a bit) i see no 1 inch between taker and sid in either 1991, 1992 or 1995/96, it mm like red said, i ain't getting into no lift debate (because it is nearly impossible to prove to debunk either way) usually the guy you want shorter will be wearing the lifts ;)
based on video evidence (of which there is quite a bit) i see no 1 inch between taker and sid in either 1991, 1992 or 1995/96, it mm like red said, i ain't getting into no lift debate (because it is nearly impossible to prove to debunk either way) usually the guy you want shorter will be wearing the lifts ;)
The Ben said on 27/May/09
There was an promo film shot for beach blast 93 with vader, sid, sting and the british bulldog.. They all stand face to face and sting says sid is 6'7 300+ pounds.... I imagine if Sid was taller that they would have redone the segment... Sid just stands there snarling...I'll try and find it.
There was an promo film shot for beach blast 93 with vader, sid, sting and the british bulldog.. They all stand face to face and sting says sid is 6'7 300+ pounds.... I imagine if Sid was taller that they would have redone the segment... Sid just stands there snarling...I'll try and find it.
Paul said on 27/May/09
I think Taker was really a good inch taller. Undertaker I believe was about 6'8 1/2-3/4 many years ago. Stacked up well against 6'10 1/2 Nash. Others I know will disagree. Frank said he saw Sid in normal clothes and said he didn't seem quite as tall as he expected. Frank also met UT in person and UT told him he was 6'9 and did look as tall. I think Sid had a little, just a little extra in his boots from time to time.
I think Taker was really a good inch taller. Undertaker I believe was about 6'8 1/2-3/4 many years ago. Stacked up well against 6'10 1/2 Nash. Others I know will disagree. Frank said he saw Sid in normal clothes and said he didn't seem quite as tall as he expected. Frank also met UT in person and UT told him he was 6'9 and did look as tall. I think Sid had a little, just a little extra in his boots from time to time.
Paul said on 26/May/09
I don't know why poor old Sid gets downgraded. He was about 6'7.5 at one time. People have been speculating on the Hogan thread that Hogan was 6'7 prime or so in boots and Sid had at least 1.5in on Hogan. It is generally agreed that Nash was at least 6'10 and probably 6'10.5 prime. Here is Sid squaring off against Nash and look 3in less with similar boots. 6.7.5 seems right. I bet he is 6'7 nowadays.
Click Here
I don't know why poor old Sid gets downgraded. He was about 6'7.5 at one time. People have been speculating on the Hogan thread that Hogan was 6'7 prime or so in boots and Sid had at least 1.5in on Hogan. It is generally agreed that Nash was at least 6'10 and probably 6'10.5 prime. Here is Sid squaring off against Nash and look 3in less with similar boots. 6.7.5 seems right. I bet he is 6'7 nowadays.
Click Here
Anonymous said on 26/May/09
sid moves further away from the camera thats why the difference occurs, sid and taker were roughly the same height, no one inch difference for sure
sid moves further away from the camera thats why the difference occurs, sid and taker were roughly the same height, no one inch difference for sure
Electric Shock said on 25/May/09
Click Here
typical example of Sid cheating in Staredowns. Sid stands on his tip toes to equal Taker. a few seconds later a height disadvantage of roughly an inch is revealed. Combined with at least a .25" boot advantage on Sid's part, We have Sid at NO taller than 6'7" and Undertaker at NO shorter than 6'8". If you think there's only .25" you need to get your eyes examined.
Click Here
typical example of Sid cheating in Staredowns. Sid stands on his tip toes to equal Taker. a few seconds later a height disadvantage of roughly an inch is revealed. Combined with at least a .25" boot advantage on Sid's part, We have Sid at NO taller than 6'7" and Undertaker at NO shorter than 6'8". If you think there's only .25" you need to get your eyes examined.
Red said on 25/May/09
My favorite dreammatch:
Sid as Lord Houmongous vs Masked Kane
My favorite dreammatch:
Sid as Lord Houmongous vs Masked Kane
Cobra said on 22/May/09
Here`s the link:
Click Here
And on second thought, here is my new list, morning and peak:
Hulk Hogan: 6ft6
Sid: 6ft7,5
Undertaker: 6ft8
Kane: 6ft8,5
Kevin Nash: 6ft10
Nathan Jones: 6ft10
Big Show: 7ft1
Khali: 7ft1,5
@ fanboy: Kane was extremelx massive around 2000, yet not as cut as Sid.
Yeah, Sid`s body is not from this world.
Here`s the link:
Click Here
And on second thought, here is my new list, morning and peak:
Hulk Hogan: 6ft6
Sid: 6ft7,5
Undertaker: 6ft8
Kane: 6ft8,5
Kevin Nash: 6ft10
Nathan Jones: 6ft10
Big Show: 7ft1
Khali: 7ft1,5
@ fanboy: Kane was extremelx massive around 2000, yet not as cut as Sid.
Yeah, Sid`s body is not from this world.
Electric Shock said on 22/May/09
Fanboy...Sid's boots were 1.25". Hogan's were .75". Undertaker's in 1991 were .5". I will post pictures to back this up soon.
Fanboy...Sid's boots were 1.25". Hogan's were .75". Undertaker's in 1991 were .5". I will post pictures to back this up soon.
Cobra said on 22/May/09
You could be right too, Alex2, here`s a match Diesel(Nash) against Sid...
It could be more than 2 inches.
You could be right too, Alex2, here`s a match Diesel(Nash) against Sid...
It could be more than 2 inches.
fanboy said on 21/May/09
Shock, You sure do make me laugh. How do you know how many layers Sids boots were? This is a fact, Sid's boots were no thicker than Hogans were or your beloved Undertaker's. Undertaker 6'7.25, Sid 6'7, Kane 6'7.5. I also think Sid is more physically impressive than any other guys at that range in height.
Shock, You sure do make me laugh. How do you know how many layers Sids boots were? This is a fact, Sid's boots were no thicker than Hogans were or your beloved Undertaker's. Undertaker 6'7.25, Sid 6'7, Kane 6'7.5. I also think Sid is more physically impressive than any other guys at that range in height.
Alex2 said on 21/May/09
Couldn't agree more Cobra!! Apart from Nash I put no less than 6'10 even today..
Couldn't agree more Cobra!! Apart from Nash I put no less than 6'10 even today..
Cobra said on 21/May/09
Here is my list, morning and peak:
Hulk Hogan: 6ft6
Sid: 6ft7,5
Undertaker: 6ft8
Kane: 6ft8,5
Kevin Nash: 6ft9,5
Nathan Jones: 6ft10,5
Big Show: 7ft1
Khali: 7ft1,5
Here is my list, morning and peak:
Hulk Hogan: 6ft6
Sid: 6ft7,5
Undertaker: 6ft8
Kane: 6ft8,5
Kevin Nash: 6ft9,5
Nathan Jones: 6ft10,5
Big Show: 7ft1
Khali: 7ft1,5
Electric Shock said on 21/May/09
Click Here
Sid coming out 1.5" taller than 6'6" Peak Hulk Hogan. Sid's wrestling boots were 5 layers, while Hogans were 3. A layer= .25". Therefore Sid had a .5" boot advantage on Hogan. Hogan coming out 6'6.75" in wrestling gear, while Sid coming out 6'8.25".
Click Here
In this picture, Sid is wearing the smallest boots of his career: 1 layer boots (.25") and is coming out about .5" taller than Hulk Hogan in his 3 layer boots. That'd make Sid in 1 layer boots 6'7.25".
So how tall was Sid? The answer is 6'7" on the nose.
I have more pictures to come but right now using Hogan at 6'6" I have:
Kevin Nash- 6'9.75" (comes out 2.75" taller than Sid in equal boots.)
Undertaker- 6'8.25" (in 1992 came out slightly taller than Sid when Sid had a .75" boot advantage. In 1997, Taker only was at a .25" boot disadvantage and came out an inch taller.)
Sid- 6'7" (wore large boots)
Mabel- 6'6.75" (comes out the exact same height as Sid in a staredown on Kevin Nash; however his King Mabel boots were 6 layer boots, compared to Sid's 5 layer, which would make him about 6'6.75". Mabel also comes out about 1/3 an inch shorter than 6'7.1" Max Starks.)
Akeem- 6'6.75" (comes off .75" taller than Hogan)
Hulk Hogan- 6'6" (comes off .25" taller than Earthquake)
Earthquake- 6'5.75" (Legit confirmed during his Sumo days.)
Big Boss Man- 6'4.75" (comes off 1.5" shorter than Hulk Hogan in slightly smaller boots than Hogan's)
Ted Dibiase- 6'3.75" (confirmed personally by Robby in an E-mail to Ted Dibiase)
Click Here
Sid coming out 1.5" taller than 6'6" Peak Hulk Hogan. Sid's wrestling boots were 5 layers, while Hogans were 3. A layer= .25". Therefore Sid had a .5" boot advantage on Hogan. Hogan coming out 6'6.75" in wrestling gear, while Sid coming out 6'8.25".
Click Here
In this picture, Sid is wearing the smallest boots of his career: 1 layer boots (.25") and is coming out about .5" taller than Hulk Hogan in his 3 layer boots. That'd make Sid in 1 layer boots 6'7.25".
So how tall was Sid? The answer is 6'7" on the nose.
I have more pictures to come but right now using Hogan at 6'6" I have:
Kevin Nash- 6'9.75" (comes out 2.75" taller than Sid in equal boots.)
Undertaker- 6'8.25" (in 1992 came out slightly taller than Sid when Sid had a .75" boot advantage. In 1997, Taker only was at a .25" boot disadvantage and came out an inch taller.)
Sid- 6'7" (wore large boots)
Mabel- 6'6.75" (comes out the exact same height as Sid in a staredown on Kevin Nash; however his King Mabel boots were 6 layer boots, compared to Sid's 5 layer, which would make him about 6'6.75". Mabel also comes out about 1/3 an inch shorter than 6'7.1" Max Starks.)
Akeem- 6'6.75" (comes off .75" taller than Hogan)
Hulk Hogan- 6'6" (comes off .25" taller than Earthquake)
Earthquake- 6'5.75" (Legit confirmed during his Sumo days.)
Big Boss Man- 6'4.75" (comes off 1.5" shorter than Hulk Hogan in slightly smaller boots than Hogan's)
Ted Dibiase- 6'3.75" (confirmed personally by Robby in an E-mail to Ted Dibiase)
Anonymous said on 20/May/09
Big King says on 20/May/09
Rob, 6'6.5" is a downgraded bs for Eudy! He towers a foot over Mamun who is a very strong 5'8" guy. Let's give Eudy 6'7.5", that could be a solution, don't you think so?
Why dont we let Mamun himself decide.
Big King says on 20/May/09
Rob, 6'6.5" is a downgraded bs for Eudy! He towers a foot over Mamun who is a very strong 5'8" guy. Let's give Eudy 6'7.5", that could be a solution, don't you think so?
Why dont we let Mamun himself decide.
Big King said on 20/May/09
Rob, 6'6.5" is a downgraded bs for Eudy! He towers a foot over Mamun who is a very strong 5'8" guy. Let's give Eudy 6'7.5", that could be a solution, don't you think so?
Rob, 6'6.5" is a downgraded bs for Eudy! He towers a foot over Mamun who is a very strong 5'8" guy. Let's give Eudy 6'7.5", that could be a solution, don't you think so?
topdweeb said on 18/May/09
The Ben says on 17/May/09
"Sid was a legend. I remember him being the most physically impressive wrestler at the time..."
I have to agree. The only wrestler that was even close to being as physically intimidating has him was the Warlord, but Sid was still bigger.
The Ben says on 17/May/09
"Sid was a legend. I remember him being the most physically impressive wrestler at the time..."
I have to agree. The only wrestler that was even close to being as physically intimidating has him was the Warlord, but Sid was still bigger.
Danimal said on 17/May/09
alex_scandinavia says on 17/May/09
i think Sid was at his peak a strong 6'7 barefoot. Undertaker had him by one inch which gives the Undertaker a peak height of 6'8.. Big John Studd was probably 6'7 also barefoot..but big John Studd had the biggest heels on hes boots of thes guys then sid.. what was Sid's billed height? i know he was billed back in the WCW at 6'8 and 6'9 time to time and 316 pounds...
the Undertaker 6'8 (billed as 6'10
alex_scandinavia says on 17/May/09
i think Sid was at his peak a strong 6'7 barefoot. Undertaker had him by one inch which gives the Undertaker a peak height of 6'8.. Big John Studd was probably 6'7 also barefoot..but big John Studd had the biggest heels on hes boots of thes guys then sid.. what was Sid's billed height? i know he was billed back in the WCW at 6'8 and 6'9 time to time and 316 pounds...
the Undertaker 6'8 (billed as 6'10
The Ben said on 17/May/09
I always thought sid was a legit 6'8.. He looked the same height as the undertaker to me.
I thought at one time they where both 6'8.. sid looks to have lost a lot since his leg injury.. maybe 6'6..
Sid was a legend. I remember him being the most physically impressive wrestler at the time...
I always thought sid was a legit 6'8.. He looked the same height as the undertaker to me.
I thought at one time they where both 6'8.. sid looks to have lost a lot since his leg injury.. maybe 6'6..
Sid was a legend. I remember him being the most physically impressive wrestler at the time...
alex_scandinavia said on 17/May/09
i think Sid was at his peak a strong 6'7 barefoot. Undertaker had him by one inch which gives the Undertaker a peak height of 6'8.. Big John Studd was probably 6'7 also barefoot..but big John Studd had the biggest heels on hes boots of thes guys then sid.. what was Sid's billed height? i know he was billed back in the WCW at 6'8 and 6'9 time to time and 316 pounds...
the Undertaker 6'8 (billed as 6'10
i think Sid was at his peak a strong 6'7 barefoot. Undertaker had him by one inch which gives the Undertaker a peak height of 6'8.. Big John Studd was probably 6'7 also barefoot..but big John Studd had the biggest heels on hes boots of thes guys then sid.. what was Sid's billed height? i know he was billed back in the WCW at 6'8 and 6'9 time to time and 316 pounds...
the Undertaker 6'8 (billed as 6'10
aaron said on 15/May/09
christ, sid looks to be a foot taller than mamun in that pic
christ, sid looks to be a foot taller than mamun in that pic
Anonymous said on 12/May/09
He is taller then that
He is taller then that
cottonman1973 said on 11/May/09
he never really went for real heavy weights but he could could take 300 and do reps all day long, all I could get was about 335 he was getting around 375. I met him thru a friend of mine, Sid was taking a break from wrestling and was selling farm chemicals at the time. Actually have been out to eat with him and his wife, they are both great people. That was back in 1996, I'm sure getting old.
he never really went for real heavy weights but he could could take 300 and do reps all day long, all I could get was about 335 he was getting around 375. I met him thru a friend of mine, Sid was taking a break from wrestling and was selling farm chemicals at the time. Actually have been out to eat with him and his wife, they are both great people. That was back in 1996, I'm sure getting old.
Sid said on 11/May/09
cottonman1973 How much was sid benching. was he going heavy
cottonman1973 How much was sid benching. was he going heavy
MAMUN said on 9/May/09
first one on 2n December 1996 !
the second on 29 november 1996 !
Regards
Mamun
first one on 2n December 1996 !
the second on 29 november 1996 !
Regards
Mamun
Cobra said on 8/May/09
I actually think Sid is 6ft7 or a tad above.
Mamun, can you tell me when the pics with you and Sid were taken?
I actually think Sid is 6ft7 or a tad above.
Mamun, can you tell me when the pics with you and Sid were taken?
cottonman1973 said on 6/May/09
I've met Sid many times and have actually worked out with him a few times. I'm 6'3 bare foot and close to 6'5 in my work boots and would have guessed Sid in the 6'7 to 6'8 range. Sid is a great guy.
I've met Sid many times and have actually worked out with him a few times. I'm 6'3 bare foot and close to 6'5 in my work boots and would have guessed Sid in the 6'7 to 6'8 range. Sid is a great guy.
Derek said on 24/Apr/09
Ola says on 3/Apr/09
"6'5 for monsoon is ridiculous, the man was never a full 6'4. He was in big shows not even 3 inches taller than ali(without shoes) i wouldt rule out 6'3 for a peak monsoon either"
Monsoon was taller than Vader in 1996 and Vader was in ring gear.
Ola says on 3/Apr/09
"6'5 for monsoon is ridiculous, the man was never a full 6'4. He was in big shows not even 3 inches taller than ali(without shoes) i wouldt rule out 6'3 for a peak monsoon either"
Monsoon was taller than Vader in 1996 and Vader was in ring gear.
miko said on 23/Apr/09
I still think he was a flat 6"7 when he faced Undertaker - who himself was not far off 6"8.
I still think he was a flat 6"7 when he faced Undertaker - who himself was not far off 6"8.
iClarke-93 said on 14/Apr/09
You don't know for a fact that Vince was shoeless and Vince was 6'1.5 at his peak. Also Orton has much better posture than Monsoon does.
You don't know for a fact that Vince was shoeless and Vince was 6'1.5 at his peak. Also Orton has much better posture than Monsoon does.
iClarke-93 said on 4/Apr/09
Ola says on 3/Apr/09
6'5 for monsoon is ridiculous, the man was never a full 6'4. He was in big shows not even 3 inches taller than ali(without shoes) i wouldt rule out 6'3 for a peak monsoon either
Monsoon had at least 3 inches on 6'1.5 Vince McMahon so anything under 6'4.5 for Monsoon is ridiculous.
Ola says on 3/Apr/09
6'5 for monsoon is ridiculous, the man was never a full 6'4. He was in big shows not even 3 inches taller than ali(without shoes) i wouldt rule out 6'3 for a peak monsoon either
Monsoon had at least 3 inches on 6'1.5 Vince McMahon so anything under 6'4.5 for Monsoon is ridiculous.
mike said on 31/Mar/09
sid says on 25/Jan/09
heres sid vs jbl. sid looks to have 2 inches on jbl. no way more like an inch imo,you have bradshaw about 6'6" and sid around 6'7",maybe it,s the camera angle ,but that,s what it looked like to me.
sid says on 25/Jan/09
heres sid vs jbl. sid looks to have 2 inches on jbl. no way more like an inch imo,you have bradshaw about 6'6" and sid around 6'7",maybe it,s the camera angle ,but that,s what it looked like to me.
JT said on 30/Mar/09
Click Here
Click Here
Interesting though IMO Sid would have a solid inch on Spivey if both were fully erect. Spivey was noticeably shorter next to Nash than Sid was.
Click Here
Click Here
Interesting though IMO Sid would have a solid inch on Spivey if both were fully erect. Spivey was noticeably shorter next to Nash than Sid was.
Red said on 28/Mar/09
Gorilla was 6
Gorilla was 6
Danimal said on 27/Mar/09
Vegas says on 27/Mar/09
Danimal says on 26/Mar/09
At 4:12 Gorilla straightens out and appears to be 2-2.5" shorter than Sid and Gorillas was already 60 years old there and VERY sick (he died 1.5 years later). Gorilla was a STRONG 6'5" man in his youth and rounded up to 6'6". By the late 1990's he may have slipped down to 6'4"-6'4.5".
i wasn't expecting you to play the shrinking card ;)
1976 age 38 with vince Click Here
1997 age 59 with vince Click Here
I admit, he looks taller in 1997, than he did in 1976, but in 1997 when we see a full body shot comparison between him and Vince, BOTH in dress shoes, Gorilla looks to have 4" on Vince and does not look less than 6'5" (at the age of 59 and QUITE sick at that stage).
Vegas says on 27/Mar/09
Danimal says on 26/Mar/09
At 4:12 Gorilla straightens out and appears to be 2-2.5" shorter than Sid and Gorillas was already 60 years old there and VERY sick (he died 1.5 years later). Gorilla was a STRONG 6'5" man in his youth and rounded up to 6'6". By the late 1990's he may have slipped down to 6'4"-6'4.5".
i wasn't expecting you to play the shrinking card ;)
1976 age 38 with vince Click Here
1997 age 59 with vince Click Here
I admit, he looks taller in 1997, than he did in 1976, but in 1997 when we see a full body shot comparison between him and Vince, BOTH in dress shoes, Gorilla looks to have 4" on Vince and does not look less than 6'5" (at the age of 59 and QUITE sick at that stage).
Vegas said on 27/Mar/09
if monsoon is 6'4.5 there with sid age 59 then sid is 6'8 minimum
if monsoon is 6'4.5 there with sid age 59 then sid is 6'8 minimum
iClarke-93 said on 27/Mar/09
Gorilla 6'5-6'5.25 peak 6'4.5 in his 60's.
Gorilla 6'5-6'5.25 peak 6'4.5 in his 60's.
Vegas said on 27/Mar/09
Danimal says on 26/Mar/09
At 4:12 Gorilla straightens out and appears to be 2-2.5" shorter than Sid and Gorillas was already 60 years old there and VERY sick (he died 1.5 years later). Gorilla was a STRONG 6'5" man in his youth and rounded up to 6'6". By the late 1990's he may have slipped down to 6'4"-6'4.5".
i wasn't expecting you to play the shrinking card ;)
1976 age 38 with vince Click Here
1997 age 59 with vince Click Here
Danimal says on 26/Mar/09
At 4:12 Gorilla straightens out and appears to be 2-2.5" shorter than Sid and Gorillas was already 60 years old there and VERY sick (he died 1.5 years later). Gorilla was a STRONG 6'5" man in his youth and rounded up to 6'6". By the late 1990's he may have slipped down to 6'4"-6'4.5".
i wasn't expecting you to play the shrinking card ;)
1976 age 38 with vince Click Here
1997 age 59 with vince Click Here
Danimal said on 26/Mar/09
At 4:12 Gorilla straightens out and appears to be 2-2.5" shorter than Sid and Gorillas was already 60 years old there and VERY sick (he died 1.5 years later). Gorilla was a STRONG 6'5" man in his youth and rounded up to 6'6". By the late 1990's he may have slipped down to 6'4"-6'4.5".
At 4:12 Gorilla straightens out and appears to be 2-2.5" shorter than Sid and Gorillas was already 60 years old there and VERY sick (he died 1.5 years later). Gorilla was a STRONG 6'5" man in his youth and rounded up to 6'6". By the late 1990's he may have slipped down to 6'4"-6'4.5".
Vegas said on 26/Mar/09
iClarke-93 says on 25/Mar/09
I agree 100% that Sid was a legit 6'7 but there's no way he had 4 inches over Gorilla Monsoon , Monsoon is hunched over and Sid has very relaxed posture.
monsoon isn't hunched over in that video, JT picked out some moments there, the top of his head comes to sids eyebrows
iClarke-93 says on 25/Mar/09
I agree 100% that Sid was a legit 6'7 but there's no way he had 4 inches over Gorilla Monsoon , Monsoon is hunched over and Sid has very relaxed posture.
monsoon isn't hunched over in that video, JT picked out some moments there, the top of his head comes to sids eyebrows
iClarke-93 said on 25/Mar/09
I agree 100% that Sid was a legit 6'7 but there's no way he had 4 inches over Gorilla Monsoon , Monsoon is hunched over and Sid has very relaxed posture.
I agree 100% that Sid was a legit 6'7 but there's no way he had 4 inches over Gorilla Monsoon , Monsoon is hunched over and Sid has very relaxed posture.
Kiat said on 25/Mar/09
Hogan = 6'5.5" (peak)
Sid = 6'7.5" (peak)
Taker = 6'8" (peak)
Jake the Snake = 6'5" (peak)
Hogan = 6'5.5" (peak)
Sid = 6'7.5" (peak)
Taker = 6'8" (peak)
Jake the Snake = 6'5" (peak)
Red said on 22/Mar/09
loos max 3.5" imo
loos max 3.5" imo
JT said on 21/Mar/09
Vegas says on 20/Mar/09
Sid and gorilla monsoon in 1997, looks around 4 inches difference Click Here
Sure looks close to that:
Click Here
Click Here (Monsoon is a little closer to the camera for much of that segment)
Vegas says on 20/Mar/09
Sid and gorilla monsoon in 1997, looks around 4 inches difference Click Here
Sure looks close to that:
Click Here
Click Here (Monsoon is a little closer to the camera for much of that segment)
Clay said on 19/Mar/09
MK says on 17/Mar/09
Clay says on 16/Mar/09
A couple of my buddies estimated the Big Show at 7'0-7'1 when they met him in Victoria.
Just curious, was this before/after the turn of the millenium?
This was 2002 or 2003 when they were teenagers. Giant Silva is clearly 7'1-7'2 you estimated him 7 inches taller which would be 7'0? You were just slighty off I guess. Silva TOWERED '' 6'11 '' Semmy Schilt, MMA fighter.
MK says on 17/Mar/09
Clay says on 16/Mar/09
A couple of my buddies estimated the Big Show at 7'0-7'1 when they met him in Victoria.
Just curious, was this before/after the turn of the millenium?
This was 2002 or 2003 when they were teenagers. Giant Silva is clearly 7'1-7'2 you estimated him 7 inches taller which would be 7'0? You were just slighty off I guess. Silva TOWERED '' 6'11 '' Semmy Schilt, MMA fighter.
Shock of Electric said on 19/Mar/09
The whole "my friend saw him and said" thing is so vague. For example I ran into Giant Silva last May at a show and there was no way I could guess his height just from standing next to him. I compared him visually to another worker who is 6'4.75" legit, and I saw him as being 7' even tops. The other guy had his boots on which are pretty thin .75"ish and Silva was in some casual sort of Keds that also didn't give him much at all. He looked a clean 7" taller. In the ring, Silva wears lifts similar to Jake Roberts 91-92 heel run. It's really hard for anyone to believe from second hand knowledge, let alone even from something like my story here. For example, I met Sid in '98 and I put him at no less than 6'7" but I don't have a picture so it's useless.
The whole "my friend saw him and said" thing is so vague. For example I ran into Giant Silva last May at a show and there was no way I could guess his height just from standing next to him. I compared him visually to another worker who is 6'4.75" legit, and I saw him as being 7' even tops. The other guy had his boots on which are pretty thin .75"ish and Silva was in some casual sort of Keds that also didn't give him much at all. He looked a clean 7" taller. In the ring, Silva wears lifts similar to Jake Roberts 91-92 heel run. It's really hard for anyone to believe from second hand knowledge, let alone even from something like my story here. For example, I met Sid in '98 and I put him at no less than 6'7" but I don't have a picture so it's useless.
Da Man said on 18/Mar/09
Rob's estimates are usually very good though, and in the end 1/2" isn't much. But I do think Sid was a legit 6'7" at peak, he did after all make Hogan look like a runt. No way was a peak Sid only 1/2" taller than a peak Hogan, more like 2".
Rob's estimates are usually very good though, and in the end 1/2" isn't much. But I do think Sid was a legit 6'7" at peak, he did after all make Hogan look like a runt. No way was a peak Sid only 1/2" taller than a peak Hogan, more like 2".
MK said on 17/Mar/09
Clay says on 16/Mar/09
A couple of my buddies estimated the Big Show at 7'0-7'1 when they met him in Victoria.
Just curious, was this before/after the turn of the millenium?
Clay says on 16/Mar/09
A couple of my buddies estimated the Big Show at 7'0-7'1 when they met him in Victoria.
Just curious, was this before/after the turn of the millenium?
adam said on 17/Mar/09
Da Man says on 10/Mar/09
I agree, peak Sid 6'7".
Useless. You can gather as much proof and as much people as you can to support the upgrade but it wont happen. In this page there are rules. One of the rules is that Rob wont upgrade anyone unless he is paid for it.
Da Man says on 10/Mar/09
I agree, peak Sid 6'7".
Useless. You can gather as much proof and as much people as you can to support the upgrade but it wont happen. In this page there are rules. One of the rules is that Rob wont upgrade anyone unless he is paid for it.
Clay said on 16/Mar/09
A couple of my buddies estimated the Big Show at 7'0-7'1 when they met him in Victoria.
A couple of my buddies estimated the Big Show at 7'0-7'1 when they met him in Victoria.
general93 said on 16/Mar/09
i seen the big show a couple of years ago in dublin and im 23years old by the way the 93 is the year andre died.he was 7ft tall my friend who is 36 seen andre the giant in 1990 and said he was around the 7ft mark aswell.
i seen the big show a couple of years ago in dublin and im 23years old by the way the 93 is the year andre died.he was 7ft tall my friend who is 36 seen andre the giant in 1990 and said he was around the 7ft mark aswell.
supermanfan380 said on 15/Mar/09
What I think is sort of funny in pictures with Sid and UT is that Sid had a slightly taller body, as in height up to where is head starts, but UT looks like he has a taller head.
What I think is sort of funny in pictures with Sid and UT is that Sid had a slightly taller body, as in height up to where is head starts, but UT looks like he has a taller head.
Shock of Electric said on 15/Mar/09
Sid is a full inch shorter than Undertaker by comparison in the later half of the 90s.
Can anyone tell me how tall Mamun is in those shoes he's wearing? I did some math with the pic and came out with a few different numbers for Sid, but none of them were less than 6'7" based on this pic. It seems like the only way Sid could be 6'6.5" is if Mamun gets no extra height from his shoes. Even with .25" extra Sid is still more than what is listed here.
Sid is a full inch shorter than Undertaker by comparison in the later half of the 90s.
Can anyone tell me how tall Mamun is in those shoes he's wearing? I did some math with the pic and came out with a few different numbers for Sid, but none of them were less than 6'7" based on this pic. It seems like the only way Sid could be 6'6.5" is if Mamun gets no extra height from his shoes. Even with .25" extra Sid is still more than what is listed here.
Danimal said on 13/Mar/09
general93 says on 13/Mar/09
hes wearings big trainers there but looks about 6'9".easily has a foot on mamun.i say sid is 6'8" or was sometime in his career.6'6'5" is too short for sid.taker was 6'9" in the early 90s in my estimation.kevin nash was a legit 6'10" i dont think he had sid by 3.5".
WOW, you have Andre at 7'2"-7'4", Studd at 6'8.5", Taker at 6'9". Kid, you are inflating these wrestlers heights FAR TOO MUCH....
general93 says on 13/Mar/09
hes wearings big trainers there but looks about 6'9".easily has a foot on mamun.i say sid is 6'8" or was sometime in his career.6'6'5" is too short for sid.taker was 6'9" in the early 90s in my estimation.kevin nash was a legit 6'10" i dont think he had sid by 3.5".
WOW, you have Andre at 7'2"-7'4", Studd at 6'8.5", Taker at 6'9". Kid, you are inflating these wrestlers heights FAR TOO MUCH....
Derek said on 13/Mar/09
Sid and Taker were actually eye to eye, but Taker's forehead is what puts him above Sid. If neither wore lifts, there's less than 1 inch between them.
Sid and Taker were actually eye to eye, but Taker's forehead is what puts him above Sid. If neither wore lifts, there's less than 1 inch between them.
Da Man said on 13/Mar/09
Sid never really looked a full inch shorter than Taker...ever. Sid looked to be around 1/2" shorter (possibly 0.75" max) in every face-off.
Sid never really looked a full inch shorter than Taker...ever. Sid looked to be around 1/2" shorter (possibly 0.75" max) in every face-off.
general93 said on 13/Mar/09
hes wearings big trainers there but looks about 6'9".easily has a foot on mamun.i say sid is 6'8" or was sometime in his career.6'6'5" is too short for sid.taker was 6'9" in the early 90s in my estimation.kevin nash was a legit 6'10" i dont think he had sid by 3.5".
hes wearings big trainers there but looks about 6'9".easily has a foot on mamun.i say sid is 6'8" or was sometime in his career.6'6'5" is too short for sid.taker was 6'9" in the early 90s in my estimation.kevin nash was a legit 6'10" i dont think he had sid by 3.5".
Shock of Electric said on 13/Mar/09
Sid was absolutely 1" shorter than Undertaker between '91 and WM13, possibly more if he in fact wore internal lifts which he may very well have. If not, Sid is very clearly a minimum of 6'7".
Sid was absolutely 1" shorter than Undertaker between '91 and WM13, possibly more if he in fact wore internal lifts which he may very well have. If not, Sid is very clearly a minimum of 6'7".
Da Man said on 10/Mar/09
I agree, peak Sid 6'7".
I agree, peak Sid 6'7".
Red said on 8/Mar/09
A peak Sid was no lower than 6
A peak Sid was no lower than 6
Anonymous said on 7/Mar/09
In the Davidson picture look at the actor on the other side of Hogan. His Bio says 6'5, he is about the same hight. It looks like he is slightly shorter but, he is leaning his head in and has his front leg relaxed. I think if he stood at attention like Hogan is he would be the same height if not a fraction taller. He also had big heeled SHOES on that did not have quite as big of a heel as those cowboy boots had. Conclusion, anything over 6'5 for Hogan is not right, he lived in those boots and they got him up to about 6'7.5.
In the Davidson picture look at the actor on the other side of Hogan. His Bio says 6'5, he is about the same hight. It looks like he is slightly shorter but, he is leaning his head in and has his front leg relaxed. I think if he stood at attention like Hogan is he would be the same height if not a fraction taller. He also had big heeled SHOES on that did not have quite as big of a heel as those cowboy boots had. Conclusion, anything over 6'5 for Hogan is not right, he lived in those boots and they got him up to about 6'7.5.
Anonymous said on 7/Mar/09
Davidson had to stack up to a peak 1984(30 yr old) Hogan, he was champ for only a year at that point. And Davidson was 44 yr old and retired for 12 years after a 11 year carear. His hair was turning gray, he was 15 years past his prime, nobody would confuse a 1997(44 yr old) NWO bad guy Hogan with the beard as being Hogans's peak height. Or a 2005 Sid for peak height. Davidson's peak height would have been back in the 60's! Davidson was 2+ inches taller and he bounced back and forth between 6'7-6'8 his whole carear. Sid was standing next to a 1990's diminished height Hogan and was still at best the same 2+ inches taller. I think even an old Davidson would Have a 1/2 inch on Eduy. 1984 6'7.25 Davidson 6'5 Hogan. 1991 6'6.75 Sid 6'4.5 Hogan. Peaks 6'7.75 Davidson, 6'5.25 Hogan, 6'6.75 Sid. Legit barefoot heights, no rounding up or anything.
Davidson had to stack up to a peak 1984(30 yr old) Hogan, he was champ for only a year at that point. And Davidson was 44 yr old and retired for 12 years after a 11 year carear. His hair was turning gray, he was 15 years past his prime, nobody would confuse a 1997(44 yr old) NWO bad guy Hogan with the beard as being Hogans's peak height. Or a 2005 Sid for peak height. Davidson's peak height would have been back in the 60's! Davidson was 2+ inches taller and he bounced back and forth between 6'7-6'8 his whole carear. Sid was standing next to a 1990's diminished height Hogan and was still at best the same 2+ inches taller. I think even an old Davidson would Have a 1/2 inch on Eduy. 1984 6'7.25 Davidson 6'5 Hogan. 1991 6'6.75 Sid 6'4.5 Hogan. Peaks 6'7.75 Davidson, 6'5.25 Hogan, 6'6.75 Sid. Legit barefoot heights, no rounding up or anything.
Danimal said on 6/Mar/09
6'3"-6'3.5" MAX.
6'3"-6'3.5" MAX.
Clay said on 5/Mar/09
Kozlov is 6'3-6'4.
Kozlov is 6'3-6'4.
KingNick said on 4/Mar/09
Speaking of Kozlov, not to get too off topic, but how tall do you guys think he is?
Speaking of Kozlov, not to get too off topic, but how tall do you guys think he is?
Red said on 4/Mar/09
Ola says on 2/Mar/09
Wrestlers do state alot in interviews...
:) and people here do estimate alot, some
Ola says on 2/Mar/09
Wrestlers do state alot in interviews...
:) and people here do estimate alot, some
Clay said on 3/Mar/09
Kozlov is huge he holds his own in the upper body against khali even, just being a **** load shorter. He has got to be his billed 300 pounds.
Kozlov is huge he holds his own in the upper body against khali even, just being a **** load shorter. He has got to be his billed 300 pounds.
Vegas said on 3/Mar/09
koslov dwarfed taker in mass on friday night, koslovs legs are insanely huge
koslov dwarfed taker in mass on friday night, koslovs legs are insanely huge
Clay said on 27/Feb/09
Danimal says on 25/Feb/09
Taker was 335 pounds in his ministry days. He stated so in an interview that was once posted on here. He was HUGE in the late 1990's.
+1.
He was a much thicker then than he is now, and he is still 280+ now.
Danimal says on 25/Feb/09
Taker was 335 pounds in his ministry days. He stated so in an interview that was once posted on here. He was HUGE in the late 1990's.
+1.
He was a much thicker then than he is now, and he is still 280+ now.
Danimal said on 25/Feb/09
Taker was 335 pounds in his ministry days. He stated so in an interview that was once posted on here. He was HUGE in the late 1990's.
Taker was 335 pounds in his ministry days. He stated so in an interview that was once posted on here. He was HUGE in the late 1990's.
Da Man said on 25/Feb/09
Ben Davidson: Click Here
Davidson has over 2" on Hogan with an insanely loose posture, and the guy is past his prime to boot.
Ben Davidson: Click Here
Davidson has over 2" on Hogan with an insanely loose posture, and the guy is past his prime to boot.
Da Man said on 25/Feb/09
Danimal says, "YEAH and a LEGIT 6'7"-6'8" FOOTBALL PLAYER: Ben Davidson had 2" on Hogan in the mid 1980's. Only one runt here. Watch Hogan and Sid's TRUE faceoff from 1991 where we SEE THERE FEET and there is MAX 2" difference there buddy."
Click Here
How you see the same 2" between Hogan and Sid in 1991, 2" between Kane and Taker in 2003, and 2" between Brett Hart and Roddy Piper truly baffles the mind.
The mythical 6'6" Hogan perseveres.
Danimal says, "YEAH and a LEGIT 6'7"-6'8" FOOTBALL PLAYER: Ben Davidson had 2" on Hogan in the mid 1980's. Only one runt here. Watch Hogan and Sid's TRUE faceoff from 1991 where we SEE THERE FEET and there is MAX 2" difference there buddy."
Click Here
How you see the same 2" between Hogan and Sid in 1991, 2" between Kane and Taker in 2003, and 2" between Brett Hart and Roddy Piper truly baffles the mind.
The mythical 6'6" Hogan perseveres.
Danimal said on 25/Feb/09
OLAAAAAAAA, I'm calling you out. Here is PROOF that Jesse Ventura was taller than 6'2". Here he is next to 6'2" Sting: Click Here
OLAAAAAAAA, I'm calling you out. Here is PROOF that Jesse Ventura was taller than 6'2". Here he is next to 6'2" Sting: Click Here
Derek said on 24/Feb/09
Ola- Taker was 330 in his Ministry days. He was injured and put on a lot of weight.
Ola- Taker was 330 in his Ministry days. He was injured and put on a lot of weight.
Danimal said on 24/Feb/09
Da Man says on 23/Feb/09
KingNick says on 13/Feb/09
"I do agree they're real close in height, but I'm not sure I agree UT has a camera angle advantage there. "
Taker's advantage there is slight, but he does have one. I agree that Taker has about 1/2" on Sid.
But I've always maintained that Sid was 6'7". The guy made Hogan look like a runt.
YEAH and a LEGIT 6'7"-6'8" FOOTBALL PLAYER: Ben Davidson had 2" on Hogan in the mid 1980's. Only one runt here. Watch Hogan and Sid's TRUE faceoff from 1991 where we SEE THERE FEET and there is MAX 2" difference there buddy.
Da Man says on 23/Feb/09
KingNick says on 13/Feb/09
"I do agree they're real close in height, but I'm not sure I agree UT has a camera angle advantage there. "
Taker's advantage there is slight, but he does have one. I agree that Taker has about 1/2" on Sid.
But I've always maintained that Sid was 6'7". The guy made Hogan look like a runt.
YEAH and a LEGIT 6'7"-6'8" FOOTBALL PLAYER: Ben Davidson had 2" on Hogan in the mid 1980's. Only one runt here. Watch Hogan and Sid's TRUE faceoff from 1991 where we SEE THERE FEET and there is MAX 2" difference there buddy.
Da Man said on 23/Feb/09
KingNick says on 13/Feb/09
"I do agree they're real close in height, but I'm not sure I agree UT has a camera angle advantage there. "
Taker's advantage there is slight, but he does have one. I agree that Taker has about 1/2" on Sid.
But I've always maintained that Sid was 6'7". The guy made Hogan look like a runt.
KingNick says on 13/Feb/09
"I do agree they're real close in height, but I'm not sure I agree UT has a camera angle advantage there. "
Taker's advantage there is slight, but he does have one. I agree that Taker has about 1/2" on Sid.
But I've always maintained that Sid was 6'7". The guy made Hogan look like a runt.
Red said on 23/Feb/09
Martin says on 21/Feb/09
Red, in the picture Taker / Sid, Sid has a camara advantage. Taker is taller.
We know that Martin, but it shows how close the difference is. There is about 0.5" between them, Sid has the larger body but Takers head is longer.
Martin says on 21/Feb/09
Red, in the picture Taker / Sid, Sid has a camara advantage. Taker is taller.
We know that Martin, but it shows how close the difference is. There is about 0.5" between them, Sid has the larger body but Takers head is longer.
sid said on 21/Feb/09
TELLEM
red sid had 1'5 on jbl
TELLEM
red sid had 1'5 on jbl
Martin said on 21/Feb/09
Red, in the picture Taker / Sid, Sid has a camara advantage. Taker is taller.
Red, in the picture Taker / Sid, Sid has a camara advantage. Taker is taller.
Red said on 21/Feb/09
daniel_Sweden says on 20/Feb/09
...undertaker was by no way nearly 328ibs (laugh)
Did you really followed the past 20years of Wrestling? Sure Undertaker was very lean in 1992~1997, but in the Ministry Days he was at least 330lbs at one point.
He looked also bulkier in his first year, look at his arms in his Debut match
daniel_Sweden says on 20/Feb/09
...undertaker was by no way nearly 328ibs (laugh)
Did you really followed the past 20years of Wrestling? Sure Undertaker was very lean in 1992~1997, but in the Ministry Days he was at least 330lbs at one point.
He looked also bulkier in his first year, look at his arms in his Debut match
daniel_Sweden said on 20/Feb/09
sid is somewhere between 6'675-6'7. undertaker prime 6'7 and Hogan 6'5 prime.. i mean sid or taker are not much taller than hogan if fyou look at their fights back in the late 80's...undertaker was by no way nearly 328ibs (laugh) Hulk Hogan 6'5 300 (prime) sid 6'675-6'7 310 (prime)
sid is somewhere between 6'675-6'7. undertaker prime 6'7 and Hogan 6'5 prime.. i mean sid or taker are not much taller than hogan if fyou look at their fights back in the late 80's...undertaker was by no way nearly 328ibs (laugh) Hulk Hogan 6'5 300 (prime) sid 6'675-6'7 310 (prime)
Red said on 20/Feb/09
Barefoot Sid whould be taller than 6
Barefoot Sid whould be taller than 6
KingNick said on 18/Feb/09
And thanks to you too Da Man!
And thanks to you too Da Man!
KingNick said on 13/Feb/09
Red says on 12/Feb/09
great find tuga, but in that vid Taker has the camera advantage, they
Red says on 12/Feb/09
great find tuga, but in that vid Taker has the camera advantage, they
tuga said on 12/Feb/09
KingNick says on 11/Feb/09
tuga, you're awesome man! What a good find.
Thanks KingNick, this is a good example of how someone
KingNick says on 11/Feb/09
tuga, you're awesome man! What a good find.
Thanks KingNick, this is a good example of how someone
Red said on 12/Feb/09
great find tuga, but in that vid Taker has the camera advantage, they
great find tuga, but in that vid Taker has the camera advantage, they
yoyo said on 12/Feb/09
Sid shoulder tip looks no more than 5ft1. But Sid looks more like 197 198 in height.
Sid shoulder tip looks no more than 5ft1. But Sid looks more like 197 198 in height.
KingNick said on 11/Feb/09
tuga, you're awesome man! What a good find.
I'm glad you found that b/c I always thought their staredown at WM 13 was so deceiving b/c of this angle (see the 6:28 mark) Click Here
With tuga's video, at first glance one may think Sid is taller b/c of the eye level but if you look at the top of the head it's clear UT is taller.
Can anyone capture that screen shot as a photo?
tuga, you're awesome man! What a good find.
I'm glad you found that b/c I always thought their staredown at WM 13 was so deceiving b/c of this angle (see the 6:28 mark) Click Here
With tuga's video, at first glance one may think Sid is taller b/c of the eye level but if you look at the top of the head it's clear UT is taller.
Can anyone capture that screen shot as a photo?
tuga said on 11/Feb/09
I was watching some old videos at wwe.com when I came across sid and taker
I was watching some old videos at wwe.com when I came across sid and taker
TELLEM said on 10/Feb/09
i agree vegas, seeing him in the flesh hes a tall/very big dude who i wouldn't ever want to piss off.
i agree vegas, seeing him in the flesh hes a tall/very big dude who i wouldn't ever want to piss off.
Vegas said on 10/Feb/09
i stood right behind bubba dudley at a recent tna show, i agree with TELLEM's ~6'2 estimation, it surprised me really he doesn't look that tall on tv on in many photos i have seen of him
i stood right behind bubba dudley at a recent tna show, i agree with TELLEM's ~6'2 estimation, it surprised me really he doesn't look that tall on tv on in many photos i have seen of him
TELLEM said on 9/Feb/09
this guy claims he's 5'8, but he looks shorter than mamun who's also next to sid. just compare: Click Here
this guy claims he's 5'8, but he looks shorter than mamun who's also next to sid. just compare: Click Here
Clay said on 8/Feb/09
Not at all. Bubba is the one tilting his head up.
Not at all. Bubba is the one tilting his head up.
Ghost said on 8/Feb/09
Clay says on 6/Feb/09
Uhh Ghost learn how to judge height Bubba comes up to the eyelash of SV. 5-5.5 inches.
Wow, a real class act. Anyway, Sid is leaning his head back which gives the illusion of Bubba only coming up to his eyes. If Sid was looking straight forward it would be clear that the difference is about 4 inches, which seems reasonable since Sid seems to be 6'7 or maybe 6'7,5 in his prime.
Clay says on 6/Feb/09
Uhh Ghost learn how to judge height Bubba comes up to the eyelash of SV. 5-5.5 inches.
Wow, a real class act. Anyway, Sid is leaning his head back which gives the illusion of Bubba only coming up to his eyes. If Sid was looking straight forward it would be clear that the difference is about 4 inches, which seems reasonable since Sid seems to be 6'7 or maybe 6'7,5 in his prime.
Clay said on 6/Feb/09
Uhh Ghost learn how to judge height Bubba comes up to the eyelash of SV. 5-5.5 inches.
Uhh Ghost learn how to judge height Bubba comes up to the eyelash of SV. 5-5.5 inches.
TELLEM said on 6/Feb/09
why arent my posts going thru? i'll repeat myself again. i met bubba he is 6'2.5 max!
why arent my posts going thru? i'll repeat myself again. i met bubba he is 6'2.5 max!
nick said on 5/Feb/09
5 inch difference. Bubba is probobly 6'2.5
5 inch difference. Bubba is probobly 6'2.5
TELLEM said on 5/Feb/09
i've met bubba, hes max a strong 6'2...most likely 6'2.
i've met bubba, hes max a strong 6'2...most likely 6'2.
Red said on 5/Feb/09
The Differrence looks more like 5 inches, but I don
The Differrence looks more like 5 inches, but I don
Ghost said on 4/Feb/09
Click Here
Sid has a long staredown with Bubba Ray Dudley (billed 6'4). He tilts his head back alot, there seems to be 3-4 inches between them.
Click Here
Sid has a long staredown with Bubba Ray Dudley (billed 6'4). He tilts his head back alot, there seems to be 3-4 inches between them.
Red said on 2/Feb/09
Sid is nearly the same height as Undertaker, Sids peak was without a doubt over 6
Sid is nearly the same height as Undertaker, Sids peak was without a doubt over 6
Clay said on 30/Jan/09
LoL, it doesnt appear that way does it Dan.
LoL, it doesnt appear that way does it Dan.
Danimal said on 30/Jan/09
6'7" is right on the money for Sid.
6'7" is right on the money for Sid.
Red said on 30/Jan/09
I hope Sid comes back to WWE for a final run, I would like to see him in staredowns with Khali, Big Show, Kane and the classic staredown with UT.
I hope Sid comes back to WWE for a final run, I would like to see him in staredowns with Khali, Big Show, Kane and the classic staredown with UT.
dicksock said on 29/Jan/09
6'6.5????????????? Try at least 6'7.5. He was virtually the same height as the Undertaker. I've never seen Sid look below 6'7 ever. He DWARFED the 6'2 Sting.
6'6.5????????????? Try at least 6'7.5. He was virtually the same height as the Undertaker. I've never seen Sid look below 6'7 ever. He DWARFED the 6'2 Sting.
Danimal said on 27/Jan/09
Clay says on 26/Jan/09
Looks to have a foot on Mamun so 6'6.5 is way off Rob.
I don't think Rob really cares as much about the wrestlers heights as much as we do ;).
Clay says on 26/Jan/09
Looks to have a foot on Mamun so 6'6.5 is way off Rob.
I don't think Rob really cares as much about the wrestlers heights as much as we do ;).
Clay said on 26/Jan/09
Looks to have a foot on Mamun so 6'6.5 is way off Rob.
Looks to have a foot on Mamun so 6'6.5 is way off Rob.
Red said on 26/Jan/09
sid, please don
sid, please don
miko said on 26/Jan/09
At his tallest, its fairly obviously he was brusing the 6"7 mark, not many guys can say they held there own against a peak 6"7.5+ Undertaker.
Probably is 6"6.5 today. Down half an inch from his peak.
At his tallest, its fairly obviously he was brusing the 6"7 mark, not many guys can say they held there own against a peak 6"7.5+ Undertaker.
Probably is 6"6.5 today. Down half an inch from his peak.
Anonymous said on 25/Jan/09
I always thought that 6'6.5 and 300-310 was more than enough for Sid. In some matches he was only billed as being 6'7 and just over 300 so you know that he was a least a little under that because everyone gets rounded up a least a little. It makes sense that back in the real early 90's that a legit 6'6.5 say 305-310 guy would get the 6'8-6'9 320-330 that he was also sometimes given. He was bigger than Hogan but Hogan had slipped under 6'5 in the early 90's(he is only 6'3 today) and hogan's weight was in free fall at that time and was only maybe 285, some say way less than that. I say all of this acknowleding that Sid was one of the most awesome phyiscal specimens ever in wrestling at his peak. Perfect physical specimen.
I always thought that 6'6.5 and 300-310 was more than enough for Sid. In some matches he was only billed as being 6'7 and just over 300 so you know that he was a least a little under that because everyone gets rounded up a least a little. It makes sense that back in the real early 90's that a legit 6'6.5 say 305-310 guy would get the 6'8-6'9 320-330 that he was also sometimes given. He was bigger than Hogan but Hogan had slipped under 6'5 in the early 90's(he is only 6'3 today) and hogan's weight was in free fall at that time and was only maybe 285, some say way less than that. I say all of this acknowleding that Sid was one of the most awesome phyiscal specimens ever in wrestling at his peak. Perfect physical specimen.
The Ben said on 21/Jan/09
Clay
Kahli is pretty impressive, but for me sid was the most awesome, i remember reading about Kerry von erich once describing sid as the most awesome looking man he'd ever seen.
6'2 height for von erich.. Lol
Clay
Kahli is pretty impressive, but for me sid was the most awesome, i remember reading about Kerry von erich once describing sid as the most awesome looking man he'd ever seen.
6'2 height for von erich.. Lol
Clay said on 17/Jan/09
Call me crazy but the most physically impressive is Khali. If we're just talking about physique, of course.
Call me crazy but the most physically impressive is Khali. If we're just talking about physique, of course.
Ben said on 15/Jan/09
Without even taking height or weight into account Sid was the most physically impressive wrestler i recall ever seeing and im suprised they didnt find some use for him in films.
He always seemed roughly the same height as the undertaker to me.. 6'7
around 300lbs.
I atually think a pretty decent wrestler as well.
Without even taking height or weight into account Sid was the most physically impressive wrestler i recall ever seeing and im suprised they didnt find some use for him in films.
He always seemed roughly the same height as the undertaker to me.. 6'7
around 300lbs.
I atually think a pretty decent wrestler as well.
supermanfan380 said on 14/Jan/09
I meant 87.247 as much volume as fat. There way a typo in my last post.
I meant 87.247 as much volume as fat. There way a typo in my last post.
supermanfan380 said on 12/Jan/09
KingNick,
You got it spot on with the statement that muscle weighs more than fat, but NOT as much more as people think. It is actually just under 13% heavier. Muscle is 87.247% as heavy as fat. It is dense enough to sink in water, but not like a brick. So, in other words, muscle is still almost as big in volume as fat.
Most people have a misconception about its volume, and think it is like twice as dense. Absurd.
Anyhow, muscle size, combined with the double weight myth, adds to the illusion of size some pro-wrestlers and bodybuilders have. This is also because muscle is placed on the outer silhouette of the body, while fat accumulates on the interior of the silhouette.
This is why Arnold
KingNick,
You got it spot on with the statement that muscle weighs more than fat, but NOT as much more as people think. It is actually just under 13% heavier. Muscle is 87.247% as heavy as fat. It is dense enough to sink in water, but not like a brick. So, in other words, muscle is still almost as big in volume as fat.
Most people have a misconception about its volume, and think it is like twice as dense. Absurd.
Anyhow, muscle size, combined with the double weight myth, adds to the illusion of size some pro-wrestlers and bodybuilders have. This is also because muscle is placed on the outer silhouette of the body, while fat accumulates on the interior of the silhouette.
This is why Arnold
Atoadaso said on 2/Jan/09
Sid was definitely at his biggest when he was playing Lord Humongous. He was gargantuan in those days, very easily over 300 and cut. He looks around 270 these days, with the similar conditioning as he had but significant less mass.
Sid was definitely at his biggest when he was playing Lord Humongous. He was gargantuan in those days, very easily over 300 and cut. He looks around 270 these days, with the similar conditioning as he had but significant less mass.
Ben said on 2/Jan/09
Danimal
Ok you do have a point in lots of those pics, but i still say aroun 1997 sid did weigh around 270lbs.
I think it was summerslam 97 or 96 where he was agianst davey boy smith and if you watch the match back on youtube you'll see how much slimmer he was.
It would be better if you could date all those pics.
I'd say the 1st one wwf 1995 290lbs (not looking in that great shape or big for him)
2nd one wwf 1997 280lbs (that waist coat does hide alot and it is very flattering studio shot where he's obviously pumped to the max)
3rd one 1999 wcw (not a very good shot either, he actually looked much bigger then this pic makes him seem)
4th ECW 1999 HUGE! 320lbs
5th WCW 90-91 Big and lean
Danimal
Ok you do have a point in lots of those pics, but i still say aroun 1997 sid did weigh around 270lbs.
I think it was summerslam 97 or 96 where he was agianst davey boy smith and if you watch the match back on youtube you'll see how much slimmer he was.
It would be better if you could date all those pics.
I'd say the 1st one wwf 1995 290lbs (not looking in that great shape or big for him)
2nd one wwf 1997 280lbs (that waist coat does hide alot and it is very flattering studio shot where he's obviously pumped to the max)
3rd one 1999 wcw (not a very good shot either, he actually looked much bigger then this pic makes him seem)
4th ECW 1999 HUGE! 320lbs
5th WCW 90-91 Big and lean
Derek said on 30/Dec/08
Even while pushing 50, Sid still looks pretty good. Far better than most 50 year olds anyway.
Even while pushing 50, Sid still looks pretty good. Far better than most 50 year olds anyway.
KingNick said on 30/Dec/08
Ben says on 30/Dec/08
sid himself on his latest shoot interview says he weighs 270lbs now and if youve seen him recentley you'll know he looks heavier then he did in 1997.
If you look back at his phyisique in 97 objectively you'll see he was actually far far smaller then early and late 90's.
On various shoot interview and in the wrestling observer news letter they say the mid 90's drug testing was legit, (obviously a few people were still taking stuff)
Watch sids most recent shoot interview thats all i can say. i know muscle weighs more then fat but its not as much as you think, when you consider Dolph lundgren in rocky weighed around 240 and he was prob 2 inches shorter then sid.
Im not talking bout Sid from mid 91 or wcw 1993 where he looked huge and way over 300lbs.
That makes sense. How recent was the shoot, do you have a link? Any word on him coming back to WWE?
Ben says on 30/Dec/08
Taker wore his biggest lifts in the ministry of darkens days, check out his page for plenty of photo evidence.
There was in article i once read with undertaker saying at one point he hit 350lbs, this was ministry of darknes days but now he's down to around 270lbs.
I don't know if I agree with that someone posted a full pic of him and his shoes looked normal but I have to find it.
Ben says on 30/Dec/08
sid himself on his latest shoot interview says he weighs 270lbs now and if youve seen him recentley you'll know he looks heavier then he did in 1997.
If you look back at his phyisique in 97 objectively you'll see he was actually far far smaller then early and late 90's.
On various shoot interview and in the wrestling observer news letter they say the mid 90's drug testing was legit, (obviously a few people were still taking stuff)
Watch sids most recent shoot interview thats all i can say. i know muscle weighs more then fat but its not as much as you think, when you consider Dolph lundgren in rocky weighed around 240 and he was prob 2 inches shorter then sid.
Im not talking bout Sid from mid 91 or wcw 1993 where he looked huge and way over 300lbs.
That makes sense. How recent was the shoot, do you have a link? Any word on him coming back to WWE?
Ben says on 30/Dec/08
Taker wore his biggest lifts in the ministry of darkens days, check out his page for plenty of photo evidence.
There was in article i once read with undertaker saying at one point he hit 350lbs, this was ministry of darknes days but now he's down to around 270lbs.
I don't know if I agree with that someone posted a full pic of him and his shoes looked normal but I have to find it.
Danimal said on 30/Dec/08
Who are you trying to fool Ben??? Sid is a SHADOW of his former self. This is what Sid USED to look like:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
He looks heavier now than he did in 1997? This is what Sid looks like TODAY: Click Here
Sorry, but you lose Big Ben.
Who are you trying to fool Ben??? Sid is a SHADOW of his former self. This is what Sid USED to look like:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
He looks heavier now than he did in 1997? This is what Sid looks like TODAY: Click Here
Sorry, but you lose Big Ben.
tuga said on 30/Dec/08
Ben says on 30/Dec/08
Taker wore his biggest lifts in the ministry of darkens days, check out his page for plenty of photo evidence.
Taker
Ben says on 30/Dec/08
Taker wore his biggest lifts in the ministry of darkens days, check out his page for plenty of photo evidence.
Taker
Ben said on 30/Dec/08
Taker wore his biggest lifts in the ministry of darkens days, check out his page for plenty of photo evidence.
There was in article i once read with undertaker saying at one point he hit 350lbs, this was ministry of darknes days but now he's down to around 270lbs.
Taker wore his biggest lifts in the ministry of darkens days, check out his page for plenty of photo evidence.
There was in article i once read with undertaker saying at one point he hit 350lbs, this was ministry of darknes days but now he's down to around 270lbs.
Ben said on 30/Dec/08
sid himself on his latest shoot interview says he weighs 270lbs now and if youve seen him recentley you'll know he looks heavier then he did in 1997.
If you look back at his phyisique in 97 objectively you'll see he was actually far far smaller then early and late 90's.
On various shoot interview and in the wrestling observer news letter they say the mid 90's drug testing was legit, (obviously a few people were still taking stuff)
Watch sids most recent shoot interview thats all i can say. i know muscle weighs more then fat but its not as much as you think, when you consider Dolph lundgren in rocky weighed around 240 and he was prob 2 inches shorter then sid.
Im not talking bout Sid from mid 91 or wcw 1993 where he looked huge and way over 300lbs.
sid himself on his latest shoot interview says he weighs 270lbs now and if youve seen him recentley you'll know he looks heavier then he did in 1997.
If you look back at his phyisique in 97 objectively you'll see he was actually far far smaller then early and late 90's.
On various shoot interview and in the wrestling observer news letter they say the mid 90's drug testing was legit, (obviously a few people were still taking stuff)
Watch sids most recent shoot interview thats all i can say. i know muscle weighs more then fat but its not as much as you think, when you consider Dolph lundgren in rocky weighed around 240 and he was prob 2 inches shorter then sid.
Im not talking bout Sid from mid 91 or wcw 1993 where he looked huge and way over 300lbs.
KingNick said on 29/Dec/08
Sid I'd say was a minimum of 300 throughout his career. Taker I think fluctuated a lot.
I've posted about a magazine WWE made around 2002 or so about UT where they referred to him as 6'8" throughout. JR wrote a brief intro talking about how he first met Undertaker in WCW and he said that Mark Calloway "began to fill in at about 280-290 pounds"
UT I think was around 300 for most of his career, just depending on the year, sometimes a little below, sometimes a little above.
And I do believe that both me are REAL close in height, within a half inch.
Sid I'd say was a minimum of 300 throughout his career. Taker I think fluctuated a lot.
I've posted about a magazine WWE made around 2002 or so about UT where they referred to him as 6'8" throughout. JR wrote a brief intro talking about how he first met Undertaker in WCW and he said that Mark Calloway "began to fill in at about 280-290 pounds"
UT I think was around 300 for most of his career, just depending on the year, sometimes a little below, sometimes a little above.
And I do believe that both me are REAL close in height, within a half inch.
Anonymous said on 29/Dec/08
When did taker wear lifts?? Sid was really close for sure, but again like its obvious on red
When did taker wear lifts?? Sid was really close for sure, but again like its obvious on red
Danimal said on 29/Dec/08
Red says on 20/Dec/08
I agree with all Danimal except Haystacks, I don
Red says on 20/Dec/08
I agree with all Danimal except Haystacks, I don
Danimal said on 29/Dec/08
Ben says on 29/Dec/08
Sid seemed barely any shorter then Undertaker, all picture evidence seems to indicate an inch at the most and in some cases nothing, going by all the pictures and taking an average i'd say sid 6'7 with undertaker being 6'7.5.
Sid was phsically far more impresive then the undertaker and apparently natural in the WWF in the mid 90's weighing 270lbs.
Sid never seemed to wear lifts, undertaker did but in their pics together they seem to have similar footwear. Big Dudes
Sorry, but Sid was NO 270 pounds. He was between 313-330 pounds. All around BIG MAN with a ton of muscle on a 6'7" frame.
Ben says on 29/Dec/08
Sid seemed barely any shorter then Undertaker, all picture evidence seems to indicate an inch at the most and in some cases nothing, going by all the pictures and taking an average i'd say sid 6'7 with undertaker being 6'7.5.
Sid was phsically far more impresive then the undertaker and apparently natural in the WWF in the mid 90's weighing 270lbs.
Sid never seemed to wear lifts, undertaker did but in their pics together they seem to have similar footwear. Big Dudes
Sorry, but Sid was NO 270 pounds. He was between 313-330 pounds. All around BIG MAN with a ton of muscle on a 6'7" frame.
Ben said on 29/Dec/08
Sid seemed barely any shorter then Undertaker, all picture evidence seems to indicate an inch at the most and in some cases nothing, going by all the pictures and taking an average i'd say sid 6'7 with undertaker being 6'7.5.
Sid was phsically far more impresive then the undertaker and apparently natural in the WWF in the mid 90's weighing 270lbs.
Sid never seemed to wear lifts, undertaker did but in their pics together they seem to have similar footwear. Big Dudes!
Sid seemed barely any shorter then Undertaker, all picture evidence seems to indicate an inch at the most and in some cases nothing, going by all the pictures and taking an average i'd say sid 6'7 with undertaker being 6'7.5.
Sid was phsically far more impresive then the undertaker and apparently natural in the WWF in the mid 90's weighing 270lbs.
Sid never seemed to wear lifts, undertaker did but in their pics together they seem to have similar footwear. Big Dudes!
Red said on 20/Dec/08
I agree with all Danimal except Haystacks, I don
I agree with all Danimal except Haystacks, I don
Danimal said on 19/Dec/08
PEAK Heights (from Tallest to Shortest)
Big Show - 7'0.5"-7'1.25"
Andre The Giant - 6'11.5"-7'0.25"
Kevin Nash - 6'9.5"-6'10.25"
Haystacks - 6'8"-6'9"
Undertaker - 6'7.5"-6'8.25"
Sid - 6'6.5"-6'7.25"
Big John Studd - 6'6.5"-6'7.25"
Hogan - 6'5.5"-6'6.25"
One Man Gang/Akeem - 6'5.5"-6'6.25"
Earthquake - 6'5.75"
Hilbilly Jim - 6'5"-6'5.25"
PEAK Heights (from Tallest to Shortest)
Big Show - 7'0.5"-7'1.25"
Andre The Giant - 6'11.5"-7'0.25"
Kevin Nash - 6'9.5"-6'10.25"
Haystacks - 6'8"-6'9"
Undertaker - 6'7.5"-6'8.25"
Sid - 6'6.5"-6'7.25"
Big John Studd - 6'6.5"-6'7.25"
Hogan - 6'5.5"-6'6.25"
One Man Gang/Akeem - 6'5.5"-6'6.25"
Earthquake - 6'5.75"
Hilbilly Jim - 6'5"-6'5.25"
Red said on 18/Dec/08
supermanfan380, yes at family fued Sid was slightly closer to Nash but Sid was in COWBOYBOOTS. But you
supermanfan380, yes at family fued Sid was slightly closer to Nash but Sid was in COWBOYBOOTS. But you
Ben said on 18/Dec/08
sids leg nearly fell off in 2000, i bet undertaker is taller today, where is the proff undertaker lost height
sids leg nearly fell off in 2000, i bet undertaker is taller today, where is the proff undertaker lost height
supermanfan380 said on 18/Dec/08
Well, both Khali and Big Show both have are pituitary disorder "giants", achromegally onset before puberty.
They will look big next to anyone.
Red, are you sure you got the inch increments right in that pic? It looks like the heads would be too large, even for the heads of guys over 6
Well, both Khali and Big Show both have are pituitary disorder "giants", achromegally onset before puberty.
They will look big next to anyone.
Red, are you sure you got the inch increments right in that pic? It looks like the heads would be too large, even for the heads of guys over 6
Danimal said on 18/Dec/08
Ghost, do you intentionally like to disagree/argue with me?
Ghost, do you intentionally like to disagree/argue with me?
Red said on 18/Dec/08
Ghost, I think you
Ghost, I think you
Ghost said on 18/Dec/08
Danimal says on 12/Dec/08
PEAK Taker was 6'7.5"-6'8.25" and Sid was 6'7"-6'7.25". Sid would be taller than Taker today, considering Sid hasn't lost any height himself
I don't buy this for a second. Taker would still be taller than Sid. I can't see Taker having lost more than 1/2 inch really. He still stacks up to Khali and Big Shoe very well. He can easily look 6'8 when he stands perfectly straight, which he does only when confronted by someone taller or same height as him.
Danimal says on 12/Dec/08
PEAK Taker was 6'7.5"-6'8.25" and Sid was 6'7"-6'7.25". Sid would be taller than Taker today, considering Sid hasn't lost any height himself
I don't buy this for a second. Taker would still be taller than Sid. I can't see Taker having lost more than 1/2 inch really. He still stacks up to Khali and Big Shoe very well. He can easily look 6'8 when he stands perfectly straight, which he does only when confronted by someone taller or same height as him.
spence said on 18/Dec/08
Sid more like just 6ft6. Nash is no way still 6ft10. He looks to have lost about an inch. i would say Nash 206 and Sid 198.
Sid more like just 6ft6. Nash is no way still 6ft10. He looks to have lost about an inch. i would say Nash 206 and Sid 198.
KingNick said on 12/Dec/08
supermanfan380 says on 11/Dec/08
Does anyone have a picture like the ones Red put up with Sid and Nash, with Sid holding his head not-tilted?
I have always thought there were only 2" between those two.
Here ya go bro:
Click Here
supermanfan380 says on 11/Dec/08
Does anyone have a picture like the ones Red put up with Sid and Nash, with Sid holding his head not-tilted?
I have always thought there were only 2" between those two.
Here ya go bro:
Click Here
Danimal said on 12/Dec/08
PEAK Taker was 6'7.5"-6'8.25" and Sid was 6'7"-6'7.25". Sid would be taller than Taker today, considering Sid hasn't lost any height himself.
PEAK Taker was 6'7.5"-6'8.25" and Sid was 6'7"-6'7.25". Sid would be taller than Taker today, considering Sid hasn't lost any height himself.
supermanfan380 said on 11/Dec/08
Wow, I actually agree with like 5 posts in a row. Yes, with no head tilt, if there is any difference, it looks less than 0.5 inch there. Sid's shoulder height is actually taller. I think Sids head is about 0.5" shorter than average for a guy his height, while UT's would be 0.5" more than average for his height.
Does anyone have a picture like the ones Red put up with Sid and Nash, with Sid holding his head not-tilted?
I have always thought there were only 2" between those two.
Wow, I actually agree with like 5 posts in a row. Yes, with no head tilt, if there is any difference, it looks less than 0.5 inch there. Sid's shoulder height is actually taller. I think Sids head is about 0.5" shorter than average for a guy his height, while UT's would be 0.5" more than average for his height.
Does anyone have a picture like the ones Red put up with Sid and Nash, with Sid holding his head not-tilted?
I have always thought there were only 2" between those two.
KingNick said on 11/Dec/08
Red says on 10/Dec/08
Yes King Nick, UT is slightly taller but not as much as in the pics with sid
Red says on 10/Dec/08
Yes King Nick, UT is slightly taller but not as much as in the pics with sid
Red said on 10/Dec/08
Yes King Nick, UT is slightly taller but not as much as in the pics with sid
Yes King Nick, UT is slightly taller but not as much as in the pics with sid
Da Man said on 10/Dec/08
KingNick says on 9/Dec/08
"I've asked this a bunch of times but no one has done it. There's plenty of UT/Sid staredown photos. I love to see someone photoshop Sid's head into being straight rather than titled back. I've seen people do it in other photos, like Big Show and UT."
Where's Nick when you need him?
This pic makes it plain as day though. Click Here
No head position on Sid's part will bring him up even with Taker, even though his features are at similar heights. Sid really doesn't have a large forehead at all, unlike Taker and Kane.
KingNick says on 9/Dec/08
"I've asked this a bunch of times but no one has done it. There's plenty of UT/Sid staredown photos. I love to see someone photoshop Sid's head into being straight rather than titled back. I've seen people do it in other photos, like Big Show and UT."
Where's Nick when you need him?
This pic makes it plain as day though. Click Here
No head position on Sid's part will bring him up even with Taker, even though his features are at similar heights. Sid really doesn't have a large forehead at all, unlike Taker and Kane.
Danimal said on 10/Dec/08
A legit 6'7" man.
A legit 6'7" man.
KingNick said on 10/Dec/08
Red, I disagree, I think UT looks taller in those pics just slightly. Though it may be because of the camera angles.
Alex posted this on the UT page:
Alex says on 10/Dec/08
The average length for a male head is 9.5 inches. But quite a few guys have a 10 inch head. Over that is normally for giant type of guys. For females the average length head is like 8 inchs I am guessing but I've seen some girls women with heads as low as 6 inches. Rob do you know the average length for a female head?
[Editor Rob: eyelevel on women is about 0.2 inch less than average male plus eye-chin length is also smaller on average.]
What Alex posted makes a lot of sense for Psycho Sid and The Undertaker. Whatever their heights are, UT is probably .5" taller because his head is .5" longer.
The shots below are a little more fair in terms of camera angles, that's why I'm saying one of them should be photoshopped.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Red, I disagree, I think UT looks taller in those pics just slightly. Though it may be because of the camera angles.
Alex posted this on the UT page:
Alex says on 10/Dec/08
The average length for a male head is 9.5 inches. But quite a few guys have a 10 inch head. Over that is normally for giant type of guys. For females the average length head is like 8 inchs I am guessing but I've seen some girls women with heads as low as 6 inches. Rob do you know the average length for a female head?
[Editor Rob: eyelevel on women is about 0.2 inch less than average male plus eye-chin length is also smaller on average.]
What Alex posted makes a lot of sense for Psycho Sid and The Undertaker. Whatever their heights are, UT is probably .5" taller because his head is .5" longer.
The shots below are a little more fair in terms of camera angles, that's why I'm saying one of them should be photoshopped.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
KingNick said on 9/Dec/08
Da Man says on 8/Dec/08
supermanfan380 says on 6/Dec/08
"If Sid was holding his head in the same position as UT, he would likely be just as tall."
No, no he wouldn't. Taker carries a lot more height above the eyes than Sid does. Taker probably has 5.5" or near it from his eye level to the top of his head.
I've asked this a bunch of times but no one has done it. There's plenty of UT/Sid staredown photos. I love to see someone photoshop Sid's head into being straight rather than titled back. I've seen people do it in other photos, like Big Show and UT.
Da Man says on 8/Dec/08
supermanfan380 says on 6/Dec/08
"If Sid was holding his head in the same position as UT, he would likely be just as tall."
No, no he wouldn't. Taker carries a lot more height above the eyes than Sid does. Taker probably has 5.5" or near it from his eye level to the top of his head.
I've asked this a bunch of times but no one has done it. There's plenty of UT/Sid staredown photos. I love to see someone photoshop Sid's head into being straight rather than titled back. I've seen people do it in other photos, like Big Show and UT.
Da Man said on 8/Dec/08
supermanfan380 says on 6/Dec/08
"If Sid was holding his head in the same position as UT, he would likely be just as tall."
No, no he wouldn't. Taker carries a lot more height above the eyes than Sid does. Taker probably has 5.5" or near it from his eye level to the top of his head.
supermanfan380 says on 6/Dec/08
"If Sid was holding his head in the same position as UT, he would likely be just as tall."
No, no he wouldn't. Taker carries a lot more height above the eyes than Sid does. Taker probably has 5.5" or near it from his eye level to the top of his head.
supermanfan380 said on 8/Dec/08
Again there is that issue that none of those guys are barefoot, and the posture is not exactly the same for them. As it is, all 3 of these guys are very close in height. We split hairs here a lot, but there really does not look to be a big difference in these guys stature. I mean to think that so much is made of one inch in height. THe difference with 6'8" and 6'9" is only 1.2% - not a lot.
Again there is that issue that none of those guys are barefoot, and the posture is not exactly the same for them. As it is, all 3 of these guys are very close in height. We split hairs here a lot, but there really does not look to be a big difference in these guys stature. I mean to think that so much is made of one inch in height. THe difference with 6'8" and 6'9" is only 1.2% - not a lot.
KingNick said on 7/Dec/08
NashOwnsAll , NICE comparison there man. I agree with you and supermanfan380, I don't think UT's frame is as large as Sid's and Nash's. UT was billed 328 most of his career and I think only during his biker era was he anywhere near that. Probably more like 275-300, depending on the year. I'd say he's about 300 now.
Sid, I agree too, is no less than 6'7.5"
UT 6'8"
Nash 6'10"
NashOwnsAll , NICE comparison there man. I agree with you and supermanfan380, I don't think UT's frame is as large as Sid's and Nash's. UT was billed 328 most of his career and I think only during his biker era was he anywhere near that. Probably more like 275-300, depending on the year. I'd say he's about 300 now.
Sid, I agree too, is no less than 6'7.5"
UT 6'8"
Nash 6'10"
NashOwnsAll said on 7/Dec/08
Good post Supermanfan, Undertaker's frame is nowhere as broad as Sids and Nash, and his flat hair makes it easy for people to downgrade Undertaker's height.
One thing I noticed with many UT staredowns is how wide apart his feet are in comparison to the guy he is standing in front, this easily drops 1 - 2 inches off someone's height. Sid and Nash always have their feet near to each other.
Here is a comparison between all 3 men, Taker's legs cannot be seen as he is wearing a long coat but doesnt appear wide as if he legs are far apart.
Click Here
Good post Supermanfan, Undertaker's frame is nowhere as broad as Sids and Nash, and his flat hair makes it easy for people to downgrade Undertaker's height.
One thing I noticed with many UT staredowns is how wide apart his feet are in comparison to the guy he is standing in front, this easily drops 1 - 2 inches off someone's height. Sid and Nash always have their feet near to each other.
Here is a comparison between all 3 men, Taker's legs cannot be seen as he is wearing a long coat but doesnt appear wide as if he legs are far apart.
Click Here
supermanfan380 said on 6/Dec/08
I do agree that the difference with Sid and Nash was not much. Oddly, UT and Sid looked the same height, but it looked like Sid was closer to Nash. Most here feel that Sid was 0.5" shorter than taker, due to the top of their heads in "face off" shots in wrestling videos.
The hard part of that is that neither was barefoot, and Sid
I do agree that the difference with Sid and Nash was not much. Oddly, UT and Sid looked the same height, but it looked like Sid was closer to Nash. Most here feel that Sid was 0.5" shorter than taker, due to the top of their heads in "face off" shots in wrestling videos.
The hard part of that is that neither was barefoot, and Sid
tuga said on 29/Nov/08
Great video, I remeber watching it back then.
Here
Great video, I remeber watching it back then.
Here
Red said on 29/Nov/08
Rob, what height did you put on here for Sid? morning, midday or evening?
Rob, what height did you put on here for Sid? morning, midday or evening?
KingNick said on 28/Nov/08
Red says on 28/Nov/08
Shock of Electric says on 22/Nov/08
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter.
I say Taker is max 0.5 inches taller than Sid
Sid is very close in height to Undertaker Click Here (4min+), I think they
Red says on 28/Nov/08
Shock of Electric says on 22/Nov/08
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter.
I say Taker is max 0.5 inches taller than Sid
Sid is very close in height to Undertaker Click Here (4min+), I think they
Red said on 28/Nov/08
Shock of Electric says on 22/Nov/08
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter.
I say Taker is max 0.5 inches taller than Sid
Sid is very close in height to Undertaker Click Here (4min+), I think they
Shock of Electric says on 22/Nov/08
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter.
I say Taker is max 0.5 inches taller than Sid
Sid is very close in height to Undertaker Click Here (4min+), I think they
tuga said on 24/Nov/08
Shock of Electric says on 22/Nov/08
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter. I feel both men on here are lowballed as much as 1" and a lot of people seem to think Sid should be bumped up to 6'7" at least.
I agree, I have seen no evidence of anything below 6'7 for sid, and for that estimate I
Shock of Electric says on 22/Nov/08
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter. I feel both men on here are lowballed as much as 1" and a lot of people seem to think Sid should be bumped up to 6'7" at least.
I agree, I have seen no evidence of anything below 6'7 for sid, and for that estimate I
Shock of Electric said on 22/Nov/08
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter. I feel both men on here are lowballed as much as 1" and a lot of people seem to think Sid should be bumped up to 6'7" at least.
Sid definitely just about an inch shorter than Taker but no less than .75" shorter. I feel both men on here are lowballed as much as 1" and a lot of people seem to think Sid should be bumped up to 6'7" at least.
KingNick said on 14/Nov/08
Ola says on 14/Nov/08
KingNick, windham was not taller than 6'4 scott hall
If you think Scott Hall was 6'4" :>)
Ola says on 14/Nov/08
KingNick, windham was not taller than 6'4 scott hall
If you think Scott Hall was 6'4" :>)
sidewalk said on 13/Nov/08
Wow, what are you talking about Scott? Sid broke his leg I've seen the video many times and it looks sick. Maybe Sid has worn lifts,Idk but that's not the reason he broke his leg. It's because all his weight came down one one leg that was stiff. I think he's as tall as the Undertaker. I'd have to see more pics and comparisons to be completely sure. If Taker is 6'7.5 I say Sid 6'7
Wow, what are you talking about Scott? Sid broke his leg I've seen the video many times and it looks sick. Maybe Sid has worn lifts,Idk but that's not the reason he broke his leg. It's because all his weight came down one one leg that was stiff. I think he's as tall as the Undertaker. I'd have to see more pics and comparisons to be completely sure. If Taker is 6'7.5 I say Sid 6'7
Annoyed said on 13/Nov/08
6'7" peak, 6'6" is devoid of any feasability whatsoever. 6'6.5" now at a big outside stretch. But lets get this straight he was 6'7" to 6'7.5" peak, no doubt, you do not hold up like he did against Undertaker, Kane, Nash, Scott Hall, Hogan no matter what height unless your giant. This man had hogan by 2 and 3 inches AT ALL TIMES, he was around the same height of the undertaker ( i know, in big boots ) He was HUGE. not 6'6" or 6'6.5" peak. RIDICULOUS !!!!!
6'7" peak, 6'6" is devoid of any feasability whatsoever. 6'6.5" now at a big outside stretch. But lets get this straight he was 6'7" to 6'7.5" peak, no doubt, you do not hold up like he did against Undertaker, Kane, Nash, Scott Hall, Hogan no matter what height unless your giant. This man had hogan by 2 and 3 inches AT ALL TIMES, he was around the same height of the undertaker ( i know, in big boots ) He was HUGE. not 6'6" or 6'6.5" peak. RIDICULOUS !!!!!
tuga said on 11/Nov/08
If sid was 6'6 1/2 peak, I wonder how tall would Magic Johnson be for example since he was shorter next to nash than sid was...
If sid was 6'6 1/2 peak, I wonder how tall would Magic Johnson be for example since he was shorter next to nash than sid was...
Scott said on 11/Nov/08
I think 6'6.5" is right on or even a bit generous. Everyone has to keep in mind that he's a prowrestler. Sid has always had some of the most massive lifts in the business. Even as a child I could spot that he was on his toes in those boots. From what I've heard it wasn't his leg he broke back in 2000, it was his ankle due to landing on the lift wrong(common mishap back in the 70's with platforms)Apart from watching their range of motion another easy way to tell which guys in wrestling have the big lifts is to look at knee pad positioning. Wrestlers who are lifted alot will wear them just below their knee so that their lower leg doesn't look out of proportion.
I think 6'6.5" is right on or even a bit generous. Everyone has to keep in mind that he's a prowrestler. Sid has always had some of the most massive lifts in the business. Even as a child I could spot that he was on his toes in those boots. From what I've heard it wasn't his leg he broke back in 2000, it was his ankle due to landing on the lift wrong(common mishap back in the 70's with platforms)Apart from watching their range of motion another easy way to tell which guys in wrestling have the big lifts is to look at knee pad positioning. Wrestlers who are lifted alot will wear them just below their knee so that their lower leg doesn't look out of proportion.
Annoyed said on 7/Nov/08
i have never ever seen Sid look anywhere less than 6'7", why on earth did this man ver get judged as low as 6'6.5" here??????? billed at 6'9" his whole life, less than an inch shorter than Taker, 3 inches shorter than Nash and sometimes only 2" shorter, this guy is 6'7" MINIMUM and i think we would all agree on a definite upgrade, he could even be 6'8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But 6'7" at the barest minimum possible (!) !!
i have never ever seen Sid look anywhere less than 6'7", why on earth did this man ver get judged as low as 6'6.5" here??????? billed at 6'9" his whole life, less than an inch shorter than Taker, 3 inches shorter than Nash and sometimes only 2" shorter, this guy is 6'7" MINIMUM and i think we would all agree on a definite upgrade, he could even be 6'8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But 6'7" at the barest minimum possible (!) !!
Steve said on 2/Nov/08
Sorry typo, i meant to say i pin his height down between 6'7 - 6'9
Sorry typo, i meant to say i pin his height down between 6'7 - 6'9
Steve said on 1/Nov/08
Supermanfan380 I couldnt have said it better myself, thats why I think its a joke when anyone here tries to pin down a height to 0.5' basically your kidding yourselves. Its impossible to pin someones height by just looking at photos, unless they are standing next to a measuring tape or ruler.
This is why I still give Sid 6'7 - 6'7.5 barefoot
Supermanfan380 I couldnt have said it better myself, thats why I think its a joke when anyone here tries to pin down a height to 0.5' basically your kidding yourselves. Its impossible to pin someones height by just looking at photos, unless they are standing next to a measuring tape or ruler.
This is why I still give Sid 6'7 - 6'7.5 barefoot
supermanfan380 said on 1/Nov/08
I believe the name of the science I am talking to perform the geometric analysis is called: projective geometry. They rarely give exact numbers, they always have an excepted margin of error. What it can disprove if something is shorter than claimed, if it comes back way out of the margin of error.
I believe the name of the science I am talking to perform the geometric analysis is called: projective geometry. They rarely give exact numbers, they always have an excepted margin of error. What it can disprove if something is shorter than claimed, if it comes back way out of the margin of error.
Ben said on 1/Nov/08
Well said superfan380. I get fed up people saying they can judge someones height to 0'5 inch.
however you see it, Sid is (or was) one very impressive person 6'6 or 6'8 the mans tall!
Well said superfan380. I get fed up people saying they can judge someones height to 0'5 inch.
however you see it, Sid is (or was) one very impressive person 6'6 or 6'8 the mans tall!
Red said on 1/Nov/08
supermanfan380 says on 31/Oct/08
...2
supermanfan380 says on 31/Oct/08
...2
tomcat13 said on 31/Oct/08
I would absolutely agree with the previous posts reasoning. I have a question for Mamun. There is another pic of him with Barry Windham, wherein it claims Windham is 6'5" given Mamun's height of 5'8". The photo to photo differences between Windham and Sid, appear to give clearly more than a 1.5 inch difference in height. Neither Sid or Windham is standing perfectly straight, either. The previous post mentioned Sid's shoot interview and he was correct in stating Sid giving his height at 6'8". In fact Sid gave his height at 6'9"-6'8" in that shoot video from 1998(those who've seen the video, can verify this). Given all of this why would you give Sid such a low estimation?
I would absolutely agree with the previous posts reasoning. I have a question for Mamun. There is another pic of him with Barry Windham, wherein it claims Windham is 6'5" given Mamun's height of 5'8". The photo to photo differences between Windham and Sid, appear to give clearly more than a 1.5 inch difference in height. Neither Sid or Windham is standing perfectly straight, either. The previous post mentioned Sid's shoot interview and he was correct in stating Sid giving his height at 6'8". In fact Sid gave his height at 6'9"-6'8" in that shoot video from 1998(those who've seen the video, can verify this). Given all of this why would you give Sid such a low estimation?
supermanfan380 said on 31/Oct/08
I have not seen any proof Sid is shorter than what he says, and he certainly looks significantly taller than most anyone he meets in an average day. The Information being used here to pin down Sid
I have not seen any proof Sid is shorter than what he says, and he certainly looks significantly taller than most anyone he meets in an average day. The Information being used here to pin down Sid
KingNick said on 27/Oct/08
James says on 26/Oct/08
King Nick is that really you as the Joker in the vid? How tall are u then Nick?
That's me bud. I'm 5'10.5" in my bare feet. In that video I had on work boots so I was probably closer 6'.
James says on 26/Oct/08
King Nick is that really you as the Joker in the vid? How tall are u then Nick?
That's me bud. I'm 5'10.5" in my bare feet. In that video I had on work boots so I was probably closer 6'.
KingNick said on 25/Oct/08
James, lol, because I love it! I'm an actor, it's a weekend job. I'm working there this year too. I play the Joker. If anyone is interested in seeing my Joker impression feel free to visit Click Here
And I think that's a good guess with Goldust.
Nice photos Vegas. I'm think Goldy is 6'4.5" - 6'5".
James, lol, because I love it! I'm an actor, it's a weekend job. I'm working there this year too. I play the Joker. If anyone is interested in seeing my Joker impression feel free to visit Click Here
And I think that's a good guess with Goldust.
Nice photos Vegas. I'm think Goldy is 6'4.5" - 6'5".
tuga said on 25/Oct/08
Well, Goldust is at least 6'5, he does seem to edge windham a little bit, so 6'5 1/2 is probably more accurate.
Well, Goldust is at least 6'5, he does seem to edge windham a little bit, so 6'5 1/2 is probably more accurate.
Anonymous said on 23/Oct/08
Check out the Rock on this site, he is given only 6'3 and he is less than 3 inches shorter to Manum than Sid is. Manum comes up to The Rocks lower lip while Manum is exactly a head shorter. And the Rock is slouching.
Check out the Rock on this site, he is given only 6'3 and he is less than 3 inches shorter to Manum than Sid is. Manum comes up to The Rocks lower lip while Manum is exactly a head shorter. And the Rock is slouching.
Heights are barefeet estimates, derived from quotations, official websites, agency resumes, in person encounters with actors at conventions and pictures/films.
Other vital statistics like weight or shoe size measurements have been sourced from newspapers, books, resumes or social media.
Celebrity Fan Photos and Agency Pictures of stars are © to their respective owners.