Add a Comment9900 comments
Average Guess (947 Votes)
Peak: 6ft 7.68in (202.4cm)
Current: 6ft 6.4in (199.1cm)
Peak: 6ft 7.68in (202.4cm)
Current: 6ft 6.4in (199.1cm)
Red said on 21/Apr/09
Rantsrob says on 20/Apr/09
Red says on 20/Apr/09
Rantsrob says on 19/Apr/09
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
Thats ridiculous, Ut is at least 2 milimeter taller in that pic
Fail to detect sarcasm..sigh
;)
I was to fast and forgot the smiley :))
Rantsrob says on 20/Apr/09
Red says on 20/Apr/09
Rantsrob says on 19/Apr/09
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
Thats ridiculous, Ut is at least 2 milimeter taller in that pic
Fail to detect sarcasm..sigh
;)
I was to fast and forgot the smiley :))
general93 said on 21/Apr/09
john tenta was easily 6'6" he was taller than peak hogan who was probably 6'5-6" so 6'6.5" for tenta would be about right. taker peak was closer to 6'9" 6'8" today. sid akeem studd were all around the same height of about 6'7.5"-8.5".jake roberts 6'5" maybe 6'4.5".bossman seemed alot taller when he started looked his billed height of 6'6" but then sometimes looked only 6'2" which is still tall.
john tenta was easily 6'6" he was taller than peak hogan who was probably 6'5-6" so 6'6.5" for tenta would be about right. taker peak was closer to 6'9" 6'8" today. sid akeem studd were all around the same height of about 6'7.5"-8.5".jake roberts 6'5" maybe 6'4.5".bossman seemed alot taller when he started looked his billed height of 6'6" but then sometimes looked only 6'2" which is still tall.
Rantsrob said on 20/Apr/09
Red says on 20/Apr/09
Rantsrob says on 19/Apr/09
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
Thats ridiculous, Ut is at least 2 milimeter taller in that pic
Fail to detect sarcasm..sigh
Red says on 20/Apr/09
Rantsrob says on 19/Apr/09
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
Thats ridiculous, Ut is at least 2 milimeter taller in that pic
Fail to detect sarcasm..sigh
Red said on 20/Apr/09
Rantsrob says on 19/Apr/09
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
Thats ridiculous, Ut is at least 2 milimeter taller in that pic
Rantsrob says on 19/Apr/09
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
Thats ridiculous, Ut is at least 2 milimeter taller in that pic
Da Man said on 20/Apr/09
Taker really did have a very loose posture with Albert though. Bent knees, slumped shoulders, etc. Albert is squeezing out everything he can and even shifting his weight to the balls of his feet to eek out that extra fraction of an inch. Footwear is also a factor not quite to the degree posture is, IMO. JT has full length photos of the Albert/Taker staredown in his photobucket account under the Albert entry.
Taker really did have a very loose posture with Albert though. Bent knees, slumped shoulders, etc. Albert is squeezing out everything he can and even shifting his weight to the balls of his feet to eek out that extra fraction of an inch. Footwear is also a factor not quite to the degree posture is, IMO. JT has full length photos of the Albert/Taker staredown in his photobucket account under the Albert entry.
Rantsrob said on 19/Apr/09
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
Undertaker has about one militmeter on Albert in robbys picture.
sid said on 18/Apr/09
Heres taker and hhh in france couple days back, and taker had abour 6 inches on hhh Click Here
Heres taker and hhh in france couple days back, and taker had abour 6 inches on hhh Click Here
Alex2 said on 18/Apr/09
Test was minimum 6'5.5 im certain.
Test was minimum 6'5.5 im certain.
Anonymous said on 18/Apr/09
Everyone knows Albert wears/wore ridiculous lifts anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if he was the same height as Test was barefoot.
Everyone knows Albert wears/wore ridiculous lifts anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if he was the same height as Test was barefoot.
Robby said on 16/Apr/09
JT in his photo album has some pretty convincing comparison pics between Undertaker and Earthquake. using Yokozuna as the difference maker in his stare downs with both men Click Here Taker looks to be about two inches taller then Quake in those pics. also Taker's head is tilted down looking down at Yokozuna. I say Tenta was 6'5.5"-6'6" and Undertaker 6'8" at his peak. its possible that he is 6'7-6'7.5" today. Jake Roberts did wear what look to be 2-3" lifts. Click Here I say without the lifts Jake is a good 6'4". as far as Test goes. we know about this pic with Undertaker and Albert again using JT pic as a reference Click Here Taker has in my eyes about one inch on Albert. now here are some pics with Test and Albert when they were teaming up as T&A. Click Here and Click Here Albert is clearly taller. so no Test and Undertaker aren't about the same height.
JT in his photo album has some pretty convincing comparison pics between Undertaker and Earthquake. using Yokozuna as the difference maker in his stare downs with both men Click Here Taker looks to be about two inches taller then Quake in those pics. also Taker's head is tilted down looking down at Yokozuna. I say Tenta was 6'5.5"-6'6" and Undertaker 6'8" at his peak. its possible that he is 6'7-6'7.5" today. Jake Roberts did wear what look to be 2-3" lifts. Click Here I say without the lifts Jake is a good 6'4". as far as Test goes. we know about this pic with Undertaker and Albert again using JT pic as a reference Click Here Taker has in my eyes about one inch on Albert. now here are some pics with Test and Albert when they were teaming up as T&A. Click Here and Click Here Albert is clearly taller. so no Test and Undertaker aren't about the same height.
Da Man said on 16/Apr/09
Taker and Test are most definitely not the same height.
Taker and Test are most definitely not the same height.
mr right said on 16/Apr/09
Well MK hes not 6'8,9,10, or 11. he and john tenta are about the same height. look at taker over yokozuna and quake over yokozuna. and over jake. theyre roughly the same height in boots. i recall they billed quake at 6'10'' when he had a stint in wcw as shark standing next to big bossman. ive never seen taker and test have a staredown. i think they are the same height as well.
Well MK hes not 6'8,9,10, or 11. he and john tenta are about the same height. look at taker over yokozuna and quake over yokozuna. and over jake. theyre roughly the same height in boots. i recall they billed quake at 6'10'' when he had a stint in wcw as shark standing next to big bossman. ive never seen taker and test have a staredown. i think they are the same height as well.
Alex said on 16/Apr/09
But I've seen UT and Test face to face in the ring and looked to be 2 inches difference. This was in 2001 so if you believe UT was 6'7 then it puts Test at 6'5.
But I've seen UT and Test face to face in the ring and looked to be 2 inches difference. This was in 2001 so if you believe UT was 6'7 then it puts Test at 6'5.
MK said on 16/Apr/09
mr right says on 15/Apr/09
Ya whatever. I dont think taker is above 6'7'' or ever has been. everyone believes in kayfabe height. taker may not even be that. and that picture doesnt do a justice. i think test and taker were close in height. taker may have had sid by .25 of an inch if that. this is interesting. john tenta aka earthquake appeared to have the same amount of height over jake the snake that the undertaker had, and quake wasnt even a full 6'6''. like 6'5 3/4''. if these guys wore 3-4 inch lifts theyd break their ankles! i think taker would be anywhere from 6'6''-6'7''. lets be reasonable people.! hes nowhere near 7'' and never has been.
Spoken like a true noob, nobody on here (regulars i mean) has ever claimed Taker to be near 7''.
mr right says on 15/Apr/09
Ya whatever. I dont think taker is above 6'7'' or ever has been. everyone believes in kayfabe height. taker may not even be that. and that picture doesnt do a justice. i think test and taker were close in height. taker may have had sid by .25 of an inch if that. this is interesting. john tenta aka earthquake appeared to have the same amount of height over jake the snake that the undertaker had, and quake wasnt even a full 6'6''. like 6'5 3/4''. if these guys wore 3-4 inch lifts theyd break their ankles! i think taker would be anywhere from 6'6''-6'7''. lets be reasonable people.! hes nowhere near 7'' and never has been.
Spoken like a true noob, nobody on here (regulars i mean) has ever claimed Taker to be near 7''.
mr right said on 15/Apr/09
Ya whatever. I dont think taker is above 6'7'' or ever has been. everyone believes in kayfabe height. taker may not even be that. and that picture doesnt do a justice. i think test and taker were close in height. taker may have had sid by .25 of an inch if that. this is interesting. john tenta aka earthquake appeared to have the same amount of height over jake the snake that the undertaker had, and quake wasnt even a full 6'6''. like 6'5 3/4''. if these guys wore 3-4 inch lifts theyd break their ankles! i think taker would be anywhere from 6'6''-6'7''. lets be reasonable people.! hes nowhere near 7'' and never has been.
Ya whatever. I dont think taker is above 6'7'' or ever has been. everyone believes in kayfabe height. taker may not even be that. and that picture doesnt do a justice. i think test and taker were close in height. taker may have had sid by .25 of an inch if that. this is interesting. john tenta aka earthquake appeared to have the same amount of height over jake the snake that the undertaker had, and quake wasnt even a full 6'6''. like 6'5 3/4''. if these guys wore 3-4 inch lifts theyd break their ankles! i think taker would be anywhere from 6'6''-6'7''. lets be reasonable people.! hes nowhere near 7'' and never has been.
KingNick said on 15/Apr/09
JT says on 14/Apr/09
Big Show says on 14/Apr/09
....Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
Click Here No tippy toes, at least here. These guys look pretty close in height to me, especially since Taker has that poofy mullet haircut. If Taker does edge out Sid, IMO it's less than one inch and b/c of his pointy head.
Sid's a monster, plain and simple. I have no idea why he's so downgraded on this site. I think he's at least 6'7.5" and I don't think there's more than .5" between him and UT either.
In that pic from 1991, I think there's actually only about a .25" difference. UT's shoes gave very little boost back then and Sid was wearing a normal wrestling boot. When they fueded again in 1997, I think they both wore normal boots and there was a .5" - 1" difference depending on footwear.
JT says on 14/Apr/09
Big Show says on 14/Apr/09
....Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
Click Here No tippy toes, at least here. These guys look pretty close in height to me, especially since Taker has that poofy mullet haircut. If Taker does edge out Sid, IMO it's less than one inch and b/c of his pointy head.
Sid's a monster, plain and simple. I have no idea why he's so downgraded on this site. I think he's at least 6'7.5" and I don't think there's more than .5" between him and UT either.
In that pic from 1991, I think there's actually only about a .25" difference. UT's shoes gave very little boost back then and Sid was wearing a normal wrestling boot. When they fueded again in 1997, I think they both wore normal boots and there was a .5" - 1" difference depending on footwear.
mike said on 15/Apr/09
i,d have to say that taker and sid are both the same height,both around 6'8".
i,d have to say that taker and sid are both the same height,both around 6'8".
Frank said on 15/Apr/09
In that picture with Test, Taker is leaning over more that Tests is and we can all agree Test is atleast 6ft 5 and and if both men were standing straight Taker would have atleast 3 inches on him
In that picture with Test, Taker is leaning over more that Tests is and we can all agree Test is atleast 6ft 5 and and if both men were standing straight Taker would have atleast 3 inches on him
Alex said on 15/Apr/09
Can't really tell from that angle but Test I think is a legit 6'5 barefoot.
Can't really tell from that angle but Test I think is a legit 6'5 barefoot.
Red said on 15/Apr/09
Great pics JT, I agree that UT is just slightly taller than Sid around 0.5".
I think Sid peaked between 6
Great pics JT, I agree that UT is just slightly taller than Sid around 0.5".
I think Sid peaked between 6
JT said on 14/Apr/09
Big Show says on 14/Apr/09
....Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
Click Here No tippy toes, at least here. These guys look pretty close in height to me, especially since Taker has that poofy mullet haircut. If Taker does edge out Sid, IMO it's less than one inch and b/c of his pointy head.
Big Show says on 14/Apr/09
....Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
Click Here No tippy toes, at least here. These guys look pretty close in height to me, especially since Taker has that poofy mullet haircut. If Taker does edge out Sid, IMO it's less than one inch and b/c of his pointy head.
KingNick said on 14/Apr/09
Alex2 says on 14/Apr/09
Yea "Bigger" as in size.
Big Show says on 14/Apr/09
Click Here
Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
That's exactly what I'm talking about with Big Show and Khali.
Alex2 says on 14/Apr/09
Yea "Bigger" as in size.
Big Show says on 14/Apr/09
Click Here
Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
That's exactly what I'm talking about with Big Show and Khali.
Alex2 said on 14/Apr/09
Yea "Bigger" as in size.
Yea "Bigger" as in size.
Big Show said on 14/Apr/09
Click Here
Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
Click Here
Here's another staredown between Sid Justice and The Undertaker. Vince McMahon says Justice is the bigger of the two, but it's clear that Undertaker is the taller of the two. It even looks as if Jusice is standing on his tip-toes a bit.
KingNick said on 13/Apr/09
Big Show says on 11/Apr/09
KingNick says on 10/Apr/09
It was the Raw after WM 15, which was 1999 I believe.
So you saw this match: Click Here
Yup! That was it. When Big Show walks out, you see the crowd to his left. I was in the upper section closest to the Titantron.
Big Show says on 11/Apr/09
KingNick says on 10/Apr/09
It was the Raw after WM 15, which was 1999 I believe.
So you saw this match: Click Here
Yup! That was it. When Big Show walks out, you see the crowd to his left. I was in the upper section closest to the Titantron.
Big Show said on 11/Apr/09
KingNick says on 10/Apr/09
It was the Raw after WM 15, which was 1999 I believe.
So you saw this match: Click Here
KingNick says on 10/Apr/09
It was the Raw after WM 15, which was 1999 I believe.
So you saw this match: Click Here
KingNick said on 10/Apr/09
Clay says on 9/Apr/09
King Nick what year did you see the Big Show? He wasnt really much bigger than Khali after he lost 100 pounds, except in the torso and legs. His legs are friggin massive.
It was the Raw after WM 15, which was 1999 I believe.
Clay says on 9/Apr/09
King Nick what year did you see the Big Show? He wasnt really much bigger than Khali after he lost 100 pounds, except in the torso and legs. His legs are friggin massive.
It was the Raw after WM 15, which was 1999 I believe.
Rantsrob said on 9/Apr/09
Paul says on 7/Apr/09
Look at this match 05.20 to 05.22. UT is taller no doubt. Then again I guess some people just see what they want to see.
Click Here
Kind of like what you did?
Paul says on 7/Apr/09
Look at this match 05.20 to 05.22. UT is taller no doubt. Then again I guess some people just see what they want to see.
Click Here
Kind of like what you did?
Clay said on 9/Apr/09
King Nick what year did you see the Big Show? He wasnt really much bigger than Khali after he lost 100 pounds, except in the torso and legs. His legs are friggin massive.
King Nick what year did you see the Big Show? He wasnt really much bigger than Khali after he lost 100 pounds, except in the torso and legs. His legs are friggin massive.
Paul said on 8/Apr/09
Obviously James S
lol....
Obviously James S
lol....
Shock of Electric said on 8/Apr/09
They are certainly very close in height, but Taker is taller than him.
They are certainly very close in height, but Taker is taller than him.
James S said on 7/Apr/09
Rob,
Its stupid putting Taker at 6ft 7.5 if you say Kane is also 6ft 7.5 when Kane is obviously atleast half an inch taller than Taker.
Rob,
Its stupid putting Taker at 6ft 7.5 if you say Kane is also 6ft 7.5 when Kane is obviously atleast half an inch taller than Taker.
Clay said on 7/Apr/09
I was at wrestlemania in Seattle but I was up in the nosebleeds, so I didn't really grasp how Big the Big Show was there. Its completely different being front row or even a few rows up.
I was at wrestlemania in Seattle but I was up in the nosebleeds, so I didn't really grasp how Big the Big Show was there. Its completely different being front row or even a few rows up.
Paul said on 7/Apr/09
Look at this match 05.20 to 05.22. UT is taller no doubt. Then again I guess some people just see what they want to see.
Click Here
Look at this match 05.20 to 05.22. UT is taller no doubt. Then again I guess some people just see what they want to see.
Click Here
Alex said on 6/Apr/09
Nash is a big man. Well today his lower body isn't big. His lower body was never huge but he had some good size back then. Now he's more upper body. Use to weigh 320lbs or so at some point. Now he looks more 290lbs maybe. Big Show always overshadowed Nash in size though.
Nash is a big man. Well today his lower body isn't big. His lower body was never huge but he had some good size back then. Now he's more upper body. Use to weigh 320lbs or so at some point. Now he looks more 290lbs maybe. Big Show always overshadowed Nash in size though.
Da Man said on 6/Apr/09
Big Show says on 4/Apr/09
"Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me."
Kind of like he did as Yankem?
Big Show says on 4/Apr/09
"Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me."
Kind of like he did as Yankem?
KAne316 said on 6/Apr/09
I dont know antone taller than that at tha age of 44. Go 17-0 Deadman!
I dont know antone taller than that at tha age of 44. Go 17-0 Deadman!
Big Show said on 5/Apr/09
Big Show says on 4/Apr/09
Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me.
Forgot to paste the link into my message aswell. So here it is.
Click Here
Big Show says on 4/Apr/09
Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me.
Forgot to paste the link into my message aswell. So here it is.
Click Here
KingNick said on 5/Apr/09
scratch that, I found it through your other videos, thanks again Big Show!!
pause it at the 5:21 - 5:23 marks Click Here
scratch that, I found it through your other videos, thanks again Big Show!!
pause it at the 5:21 - 5:23 marks Click Here
KingNick said on 5/Apr/09
Big Show says on 4/Apr/09
Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me.
Dude, I've always wanted to see that match!! You didn't post the link, could you please post? Thank you!!
Big Show says on 4/Apr/09
Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me.
Dude, I've always wanted to see that match!! You didn't post the link, could you please post? Thank you!!
KingNick said on 4/Apr/09
Clay says on 4/Apr/09
Big Show is A LOT bigger than Nash. Put them on a scale if you dont believe me.
I don't know if any of you have seen Big Show live, but it's really an incredible sight. I was at the Raw the night after Wrestlemania 15 and Big Show wrestled Test (RIP) that night. This is was the first time I had ever seen him live. When he walked out I said, "Holy ****, he's huge ..." I have never seen another human being that big in my life. And I was in the nosebleed section and I still saw him as clear as day.
I saw Khali about 6 months ago live, I was about 100 feet away. Now Khali is gigantice and certainly taller than Big Show. But Big Show is just wider and more massive all around, it's really an incredible sight. I can only imagine what it was like to see Andre the Giant in person. Even if he wasn't anywhere near 7'4", I'm sure just his girth was incredible.
In regards to Nash, I still think he's a solid 6'10". Show at peak I think was 7' even and today about 6'11".
Xpac and HBK I can beleive being around 5'11"ish. Personally I think HBK was 6' or maybe 6'0.5" at peak and today is around 5'11.5", 5'11".
Clay says on 4/Apr/09
Big Show is A LOT bigger than Nash. Put them on a scale if you dont believe me.
I don't know if any of you have seen Big Show live, but it's really an incredible sight. I was at the Raw the night after Wrestlemania 15 and Big Show wrestled Test (RIP) that night. This is was the first time I had ever seen him live. When he walked out I said, "Holy ****, he's huge ..." I have never seen another human being that big in my life. And I was in the nosebleed section and I still saw him as clear as day.
I saw Khali about 6 months ago live, I was about 100 feet away. Now Khali is gigantice and certainly taller than Big Show. But Big Show is just wider and more massive all around, it's really an incredible sight. I can only imagine what it was like to see Andre the Giant in person. Even if he wasn't anywhere near 7'4", I'm sure just his girth was incredible.
In regards to Nash, I still think he's a solid 6'10". Show at peak I think was 7' even and today about 6'11".
Xpac and HBK I can beleive being around 5'11"ish. Personally I think HBK was 6' or maybe 6'0.5" at peak and today is around 5'11.5", 5'11".
hs2009 said on 4/Apr/09
Shawn is clearly taller than X-Pac who I used to believe was 6'0" LOL. HBK was also MAX 1" shorter than SCSA back in 1996-1998 so is close to 6'0".
Big Show looks very large in that video. WWE have now started billing him at 485lbs instead of 441lbs. I really hope he doesn't put anymore weight on, he's such a good talent when he's thinner.
Shawn is clearly taller than X-Pac who I used to believe was 6'0" LOL. HBK was also MAX 1" shorter than SCSA back in 1996-1998 so is close to 6'0".
Big Show looks very large in that video. WWE have now started billing him at 485lbs instead of 441lbs. I really hope he doesn't put anymore weight on, he's such a good talent when he's thinner.
Big Show said on 4/Apr/09
Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me.
Here's a match between Undertaker and Kane (as Fake Diesel) from early 1997. Footwear looks to be the same and Kane looks taller to me.
Anonymous said on 4/Apr/09
In every staredown Show and Nash have ever had, Show has had at least a couple of inches on Nash.
At a glance they look roughly the same height because Nash is a lankier build. Show is comfortably taller though.
In every staredown Show and Nash have ever had, Show has had at least a couple of inches on Nash.
At a glance they look roughly the same height because Nash is a lankier build. Show is comfortably taller though.
Clay said on 4/Apr/09
Big Show is A LOT bigger than Nash. Put them on a scale if you dont believe me.
Big Show is A LOT bigger than Nash. Put them on a scale if you dont believe me.
Shock of Electric said on 3/Apr/09
Shawn Michaels is 5'11.5", and surprisingly that's what he's listed on this site. Compared to some of the other estimates, he should be 5'10.5" basically, but as you can see in the pic used for his page, that's impossible.
Shawn Michaels is 5'11.5", and surprisingly that's what he's listed on this site. Compared to some of the other estimates, he should be 5'10.5" basically, but as you can see in the pic used for his page, that's impossible.
Annoyed said on 3/Apr/09
How tall is HBK ?
Here he is with Nash and Show, is he between 5'11" and 6'1"?
Incidentally look how tall Nash is and how tall Big Show is, giants. Im always suprised how Show never totally outsizes Nash, they always seem to look in the same bracket. ( 6'10" - 7'0" ish ). X Pax, well who really cares, the kid is resiliant so we will give him that.
How tall is HBK though? here is the vid : Click Here
How tall is HBK ?
Here he is with Nash and Show, is he between 5'11" and 6'1"?
Incidentally look how tall Nash is and how tall Big Show is, giants. Im always suprised how Show never totally outsizes Nash, they always seem to look in the same bracket. ( 6'10" - 7'0" ish ). X Pax, well who really cares, the kid is resiliant so we will give him that.
How tall is HBK though? here is the vid : Click Here
James S said on 31/Mar/09
Taker was 6ft 8.5 at prime and peak and 6ft 6.75 or 6ft 7 now
Taker was 6ft 8.5 at prime and peak and 6ft 6.75 or 6ft 7 now
Shock of Electric said on 29/Mar/09
Nick I also see Batista as mid to high 6'3", Triple H high 6'2" maybe 6'3".
Nathan Jones, definitely not taller than Nash, right between Taker and Nash I'd say, but yes legit 1" taller than Taker.
Nick I also see Batista as mid to high 6'3", Triple H high 6'2" maybe 6'3".
Nathan Jones, definitely not taller than Nash, right between Taker and Nash I'd say, but yes legit 1" taller than Taker.
nick said on 29/Mar/09
sid i disagree batista in my opinion is at 6'3.5 and had a half inch max .75 making a 6'2.75 to 6'3 triple h. I hve soooo much evidence for a 6'3 h
sid i disagree batista in my opinion is at 6'3.5 and had a half inch max .75 making a 6'2.75 to 6'3 triple h. I hve soooo much evidence for a 6'3 h
mike said on 29/Mar/09
Nathan Jones is 6'10" or 6'11" taker only appeared to be about an inch shorter,so imo taker is around 6'9".
Nathan Jones is 6'10" or 6'11" taker only appeared to be about an inch shorter,so imo taker is around 6'9".
sid said on 28/Mar/09
Shock of Electric I Saw kane undertaker and nash up close before the event and after. Kane had a inch on taker. and nash had a inch on kane..this was years ago.they parked there car right in front where I was standing behind a fence.. they drove a pathfinder they went to the back all 3 of them to grab there gear, I got a good look at all of them I'd say nash is 6'9, kane 6'8 taker perhaps maybe 6'7 to 6'7'5 kane edged taker atleast by a inch or 5 thats in my eyes..they where up close. i said hey, non of them said anything. My gf who was my ex got there late to take the pic. so no i don't have a pic. she had the camera. i ran off when wwe superstar came pouring in that area to park there cars. so got lost ha ha lol oh well atlest i saw them up close for the first. then i saw them 2 years later, kane still had about a inch thats my 2 cents
Shock of Electric I Saw kane undertaker and nash up close before the event and after. Kane had a inch on taker. and nash had a inch on kane..this was years ago.they parked there car right in front where I was standing behind a fence.. they drove a pathfinder they went to the back all 3 of them to grab there gear, I got a good look at all of them I'd say nash is 6'9, kane 6'8 taker perhaps maybe 6'7 to 6'7'5 kane edged taker atleast by a inch or 5 thats in my eyes..they where up close. i said hey, non of them said anything. My gf who was my ex got there late to take the pic. so no i don't have a pic. she had the camera. i ran off when wwe superstar came pouring in that area to park there cars. so got lost ha ha lol oh well atlest i saw them up close for the first. then i saw them 2 years later, kane still had about a inch thats my 2 cents
sid said on 28/Mar/09
hs2009 Actually hhh is more 6'2 batista had 1'5 on hhh on a backstage promo you can cleary tell dave is taller and bigger
hs2009 Actually hhh is more 6'2 batista had 1'5 on hhh on a backstage promo you can cleary tell dave is taller and bigger
Big Show said on 27/Mar/09
nick says on 26/Mar/09
lol, i thought he was in japan before wwe and they billed him 198. They really bill him at 198 as giant bernard currently big show?
Yes they did. In his match with Brock Lesnar in NJPW in 2006 they had their heights and weights listed. Brock was listed at 193cm, 134kg (6'4", 295 lbs) and Albert at 198cm, 150kg (6'6", 331 lbs).
nick says on 26/Mar/09
lol, i thought he was in japan before wwe and they billed him 198. They really bill him at 198 as giant bernard currently big show?
Yes they did. In his match with Brock Lesnar in NJPW in 2006 they had their heights and weights listed. Brock was listed at 193cm, 134kg (6'4", 295 lbs) and Albert at 198cm, 150kg (6'6", 331 lbs).
nick said on 26/Mar/09
Click Here
the red line is 6'8 and it goes up to 7'1 khali's height. Taker always is comfortably 6'8 when comparing to khali, khali has almost 5 inches from his brow to the top of his head and about a 5.5 eye level to top of head. Taker comes a little past his eye level. The lines for inches i made makes out khali to have a 1 foot head. Taker is comfortably at 6'8 in their encounters
Click Here
the red line is 6'8 and it goes up to 7'1 khali's height. Taker always is comfortably 6'8 when comparing to khali, khali has almost 5 inches from his brow to the top of his head and about a 5.5 eye level to top of head. Taker comes a little past his eye level. The lines for inches i made makes out khali to have a 1 foot head. Taker is comfortably at 6'8 in their encounters
nick said on 26/Mar/09
lol, i thought he was in japan before wwe and they billed him 198. They really bill him at 198 as giant bernard currently big show?
lol, i thought he was in japan before wwe and they billed him 198. They really bill him at 198 as giant bernard currently big show?
Shock of Electric said on 26/Mar/09
Sid, Kane's got thicker boots than Taker, that would be the only reason he'd look more taller than JBL. Today, I don't see how that's possible since in the ring, not back stage, Taker is the same height as Kane in uneven footwear.
JBL in .75" boots, Taker 1", Taker still is over 3" taller than him. Taker's boots are by no means thick/chunky. JBL's are smaller, but not as much thicker as say, Kane compared to Taker.
I believe the Akebono/Albert staredown is not completely comparable because those boots with Taker could be wrestling boot heels plus the internal lift shown with Akebono, which is what I believe Sid had going on at WM13, and still looking 1" shorter than Taker. It's possible Albert is as much as 1.5" shorter than Taker barefoot.
Big Show appears to have MORE than 4" on Taker in 1999 but also had boots twice the thickness of Taker's. No matter what anyone claims, Taker's boots were less than 1" in 1999. The real difference in the end, about 3.75". Today in slightly more even footwear, the difference looks to be the same as Akebono compared to Big Show (3.5") but again, it's still uneven boots for Taker and Show. I believe Akebono is an even 6'8", but I also believe Taker is up to 6'8.25". Big Show's boots are not the same thickness as Taker's, even the ones he's used since his comeback. They are measurably thicker in the picture itself, and they are further from the camera so that means they are slightly more thick on top of that. At least 1.5" vs Taker's 1" approx, or if you don't agree, whatever the actual size is, x 1.5.
Triple H I believe is nearly 6'3". 6'2" is a sad underestimation for him and there are many times Taker looks 5-6" taller than him. Taker's forehead is a full 5" and Triple H comes up just under his eyebrows generally. 5.5" full difference is possible.
Taker compared to prime Kevin Nash as seen in their backstage staredown, I've seen people post Taker at a very bad camera disadvantage looking 3" shorter. This is a shot of them at the most even possible frame from the staredown. Click Here their height difference, essentially is what is between their eyes as Nash's big head is about equal to Taker's. 2" I believe is a fair difference, Nash may, MAY even have a .25" boot advantage at the time.
I also agree with the college listings for guys who are fractions more than their inch. There are reasons for not rounding up in sports, as much as their are reasons for doing so. Albert I can see as tall as 6'6.75" based on comparisons with many wrestlers. There are wrestlers who have at some time or another been billed their exact height or even been underbilled. Ted Diabiase (billed as high as 6'4.5 in Japan and always 6'3" in the US), Viscera, Test, Bill Eadie, Mike Rotunda, William Regal, all billed their actual height or less at some point in their careers, and there are others. A lot this is because of 3rd party information, or unqualified arbitrary bills. Example of completely outrageous overbilling - 5'8" Fit Finlay at 6'2".
Final question for this post, what do you guys get for Tim Sylvia compared to Taker here? Click Here This guy is thoroughly billed 6'8" to the bitter end and many people insist he is, while some others says as low as 6'5". The general fan consensus is he is 6'7"-6'8". I think he's just about 6'6".
Sid, Kane's got thicker boots than Taker, that would be the only reason he'd look more taller than JBL. Today, I don't see how that's possible since in the ring, not back stage, Taker is the same height as Kane in uneven footwear.
JBL in .75" boots, Taker 1", Taker still is over 3" taller than him. Taker's boots are by no means thick/chunky. JBL's are smaller, but not as much thicker as say, Kane compared to Taker.
I believe the Akebono/Albert staredown is not completely comparable because those boots with Taker could be wrestling boot heels plus the internal lift shown with Akebono, which is what I believe Sid had going on at WM13, and still looking 1" shorter than Taker. It's possible Albert is as much as 1.5" shorter than Taker barefoot.
Big Show appears to have MORE than 4" on Taker in 1999 but also had boots twice the thickness of Taker's. No matter what anyone claims, Taker's boots were less than 1" in 1999. The real difference in the end, about 3.75". Today in slightly more even footwear, the difference looks to be the same as Akebono compared to Big Show (3.5") but again, it's still uneven boots for Taker and Show. I believe Akebono is an even 6'8", but I also believe Taker is up to 6'8.25". Big Show's boots are not the same thickness as Taker's, even the ones he's used since his comeback. They are measurably thicker in the picture itself, and they are further from the camera so that means they are slightly more thick on top of that. At least 1.5" vs Taker's 1" approx, or if you don't agree, whatever the actual size is, x 1.5.
Triple H I believe is nearly 6'3". 6'2" is a sad underestimation for him and there are many times Taker looks 5-6" taller than him. Taker's forehead is a full 5" and Triple H comes up just under his eyebrows generally. 5.5" full difference is possible.
Taker compared to prime Kevin Nash as seen in their backstage staredown, I've seen people post Taker at a very bad camera disadvantage looking 3" shorter. This is a shot of them at the most even possible frame from the staredown. Click Here their height difference, essentially is what is between their eyes as Nash's big head is about equal to Taker's. 2" I believe is a fair difference, Nash may, MAY even have a .25" boot advantage at the time.
I also agree with the college listings for guys who are fractions more than their inch. There are reasons for not rounding up in sports, as much as their are reasons for doing so. Albert I can see as tall as 6'6.75" based on comparisons with many wrestlers. There are wrestlers who have at some time or another been billed their exact height or even been underbilled. Ted Diabiase (billed as high as 6'4.5 in Japan and always 6'3" in the US), Viscera, Test, Bill Eadie, Mike Rotunda, William Regal, all billed their actual height or less at some point in their careers, and there are others. A lot this is because of 3rd party information, or unqualified arbitrary bills. Example of completely outrageous overbilling - 5'8" Fit Finlay at 6'2".
Final question for this post, what do you guys get for Tim Sylvia compared to Taker here? Click Here This guy is thoroughly billed 6'8" to the bitter end and many people insist he is, while some others says as low as 6'5". The general fan consensus is he is 6'7"-6'8". I think he's just about 6'6".
Big Show said on 26/Mar/09
nick says on 26/Mar/09
And in japan im suprised they didnt actually put 200 centimeters for albert, this shows that they were very reluctant to put him off as a very large guy.
Yeah they were so reluctant that they gave him the nickname 'Giant' Bernard.
nick says on 26/Mar/09
And in japan im suprised they didnt actually put 200 centimeters for albert, this shows that they were very reluctant to put him off as a very large guy.
Yeah they were so reluctant that they gave him the nickname 'Giant' Bernard.
tuga said on 26/Mar/09
Danimal, this was discussed at nash
Danimal, this was discussed at nash
nick said on 26/Mar/09
first of all triple h can be as tall as 6'3 since he is about 6'4 in his footwear, second he is 4 inches taller when leaning in, if he stands straight its a 5 inch difference there. Third its not impossible to be 6'6.5 and be rounded down to 6'6 as i said some coaches would rather kave a guy be 6'6 rather than 6'7 because 6'7 sounds really tall and its not a height that is often seen in football, ie peyton manning being 6'5.5 and not wanting a 6'6 bill because it sounds "unathletic". Third a 6'6 taker would make a 6'11 great khali and a 6'3 jbl, impossible. 4th It isnt impossible someone is listed a height that they have been given in a proffessional sport when going into wrestling, it all depends on where they want the wrestler to "bloom" maybe as a generic wrestler or a huge power house. A mere round down of a half inch isnt a huge deal. Im a discus thrower and believe me that height is a factor when throwing (a factor not everything) and traditionally the taller the better, so my coach saw me measured at 6'2.5 and put me down at 6'2 why not put me down at 6'3? Not every coach is a wrestling biller that adds inches to height thats why. And in japan im suprised they didnt actually put 200 centimeters for albert, this shows that they were very reluctant to put him off as a very large guy. He could very well be 199 centimeters but it isnt an even number so maybe they decided not to do that because they its like might as well put 200 then but they didnt. this is all speculation however albert being 6'6.5 is very possible but we will never know for sure
Taker is between 6'7-6'8 today
first of all triple h can be as tall as 6'3 since he is about 6'4 in his footwear, second he is 4 inches taller when leaning in, if he stands straight its a 5 inch difference there. Third its not impossible to be 6'6.5 and be rounded down to 6'6 as i said some coaches would rather kave a guy be 6'6 rather than 6'7 because 6'7 sounds really tall and its not a height that is often seen in football, ie peyton manning being 6'5.5 and not wanting a 6'6 bill because it sounds "unathletic". Third a 6'6 taker would make a 6'11 great khali and a 6'3 jbl, impossible. 4th It isnt impossible someone is listed a height that they have been given in a proffessional sport when going into wrestling, it all depends on where they want the wrestler to "bloom" maybe as a generic wrestler or a huge power house. A mere round down of a half inch isnt a huge deal. Im a discus thrower and believe me that height is a factor when throwing (a factor not everything) and traditionally the taller the better, so my coach saw me measured at 6'2.5 and put me down at 6'2 why not put me down at 6'3? Not every coach is a wrestling biller that adds inches to height thats why. And in japan im suprised they didnt actually put 200 centimeters for albert, this shows that they were very reluctant to put him off as a very large guy. He could very well be 199 centimeters but it isnt an even number so maybe they decided not to do that because they its like might as well put 200 then but they didnt. this is all speculation however albert being 6'6.5 is very possible but we will never know for sure
Taker is between 6'7-6'8 today
Vegas said on 26/Mar/09
Danimal says on 25/Mar/09
Explain something to me then. If Taker was only 2" short than a PRIME Kevin Nash and a 50 year old Kevin Nash has at least 4" on Albert in a recent staredown and Taker is BARELY taller than Albert, does that not tell you that it is UNDERTAKER who has lost height since the 1990's? He should have had a solid 2" on Albert and not merely .5".
so you expect nash to have 3.5 inches on undertaker as of now??
Danimal says on 25/Mar/09
Explain something to me then. If Taker was only 2" short than a PRIME Kevin Nash and a 50 year old Kevin Nash has at least 4" on Albert in a recent staredown and Taker is BARELY taller than Albert, does that not tell you that it is UNDERTAKER who has lost height since the 1990's? He should have had a solid 2" on Albert and not merely .5".
so you expect nash to have 3.5 inches on undertaker as of now??
Big Show said on 26/Mar/09
nick says on 25/Mar/09
I throw in track for college, even though im 6'2.5 mid day they put me down as 6'2 because they rounded down, it happens. If albert is say 6'6 1.2 which is 100 percent possible and wore 1.75 in boots He would be 6'8.5 in his shoes. Now taker had him by a centimeter, So if taker was 6'8.75 in his boots that would make him about 6'7.75 barefoot which i can totally agree on.
Matt Bloom (Albert) was listed 6'6 while playing college football. That his height could be rounded down by half an inch could've been possible were it not for the fact that he was listed at 198cm while wrestling in Japan. So 6'6 is not a round-down, it's his max height.
nick says on 25/Mar/09
I throw in track for college, even though im 6'2.5 mid day they put me down as 6'2 because they rounded down, it happens. If albert is say 6'6 1.2 which is 100 percent possible and wore 1.75 in boots He would be 6'8.5 in his shoes. Now taker had him by a centimeter, So if taker was 6'8.75 in his boots that would make him about 6'7.75 barefoot which i can totally agree on.
Matt Bloom (Albert) was listed 6'6 while playing college football. That his height could be rounded down by half an inch could've been possible were it not for the fact that he was listed at 198cm while wrestling in Japan. So 6'6 is not a round-down, it's his max height.
Danimal said on 25/Mar/09
Explain something to me then. If Taker was only 2" short than a PRIME Kevin Nash and a 50 year old Kevin Nash has at least 4" on Albert in a recent staredown and Taker is BARELY taller than Albert, does that not tell you that it is UNDERTAKER who has lost height since the 1990's? He should have had a solid 2" on Albert and not merely .5".
Explain something to me then. If Taker was only 2" short than a PRIME Kevin Nash and a 50 year old Kevin Nash has at least 4" on Albert in a recent staredown and Taker is BARELY taller than Albert, does that not tell you that it is UNDERTAKER who has lost height since the 1990's? He should have had a solid 2" on Albert and not merely .5".
mike said on 25/Mar/09
triple h is 6 ft 2. so you'll be able to see the 4 inch difference on the youtube video. i forgot to mention this.
triple h is 6 ft 2. so you'll be able to see the 4 inch difference on the youtube video. i forgot to mention this.
mike said on 25/Mar/09
i would like to see all the wrestlers formally measured including the undertaker, if u go on youtube and type in undertaker and triple h backstage. it's the one were triple h is walking with his wwe belt and then the lights go out, then undertaker appears. i'm convinced he's 6 ft 6.
i would like to see all the wrestlers formally measured including the undertaker, if u go on youtube and type in undertaker and triple h backstage. it's the one were triple h is walking with his wwe belt and then the lights go out, then undertaker appears. i'm convinced he's 6 ft 6.
nick said on 25/Mar/09
20rry 6'8.25 in his shoes
20rry 6'8.25 in his shoes
hs2009 said on 25/Mar/09
Video of Undertaker chokeslamming Brock Lesnar, if you watch carefully then you can see the true height advantage he has over Brock.
Click Here
Video of Undertaker chokeslamming Brock Lesnar, if you watch carefully then you can see the true height advantage he has over Brock.
Click Here
hs2009 said on 25/Mar/09
Taker has about 3" on legit 6'5"+ JBL without a footwear advantage, it's plain as day.
Taker has about 3" on legit 6'5"+ JBL without a footwear advantage, it's plain as day.
nick said on 25/Mar/09
yep the big show has a clean 4 on taker back in 1999 which show was definetly 7 feet then. Takers boots with jbl look maximum 1.25. Jbls are about the same maybe a quarter in less. Taker still has him by nearly 3 inches.
I throw in track for college, even though im 6'2.5 mid day they put me down as 6'2 because they rounded down, it happens. If albert is say 6'6 1.2 which is 100 percent possible and wore 1.75 in boots He would be 6'8.5 in his shoes. Now taker had him by a centimeter, So if taker was 6'8.75 in his boots that would make him about 6'7.75 barefoot which i can totally agree on.
Now how about we take a look at the kane page and see kane have a worst problem with big "6 foot 6.5" vis.
yep the big show has a clean 4 on taker back in 1999 which show was definetly 7 feet then. Takers boots with jbl look maximum 1.25. Jbls are about the same maybe a quarter in less. Taker still has him by nearly 3 inches.
I throw in track for college, even though im 6'2.5 mid day they put me down as 6'2 because they rounded down, it happens. If albert is say 6'6 1.2 which is 100 percent possible and wore 1.75 in boots He would be 6'8.5 in his shoes. Now taker had him by a centimeter, So if taker was 6'8.75 in his boots that would make him about 6'7.75 barefoot which i can totally agree on.
Now how about we take a look at the kane page and see kane have a worst problem with big "6 foot 6.5" vis.
Ray said on 25/Mar/09
Undertaker has one of the flattest boots in the business today IMO. I think the difference with the JBL staredown is what tuga said, Taker stood straight up for a sec right before he hit JBL. Also, JBL's boots looked more flat compared to other times - maybe it's just me.
Undertaker has one of the flattest boots in the business today IMO. I think the difference with the JBL staredown is what tuga said, Taker stood straight up for a sec right before he hit JBL. Also, JBL's boots looked more flat compared to other times - maybe it's just me.
Paul said on 25/Mar/09
I have always maintained Nash was 6'10.5 (209.5cm) and UT 6'8.75 (205cm)at their tallest.
Now they are both about 1' less I would say.
I have always maintained Nash was 6'10.5 (209.5cm) and UT 6'8.75 (205cm)at their tallest.
Now they are both about 1' less I would say.
tuga said on 25/Mar/09
Here comes again the albert/taker staredown...
If Albert is 6'6 or 6'6 1/2 with bigger footware he can come easy within half an inch from a 6'8 man...
His boots against akebono are different, so they could give less boost, akebono was 4 inches shorter than big show both barefeet, well, taker is also no more than 4 inches shorter than big show in similar footware, actually, in their last matches with big show having a little footware advantage it didn
Here comes again the albert/taker staredown...
If Albert is 6'6 or 6'6 1/2 with bigger footware he can come easy within half an inch from a 6'8 man...
His boots against akebono are different, so they could give less boost, akebono was 4 inches shorter than big show both barefeet, well, taker is also no more than 4 inches shorter than big show in similar footware, actually, in their last matches with big show having a little footware advantage it didn
sid said on 25/Mar/09
Shock of Electric Kane looks taller to jbl then undertaker does. jbl 6'5. taker 6'8.. kane 6'8'5 jbl 6'5 makes sense
Shock of Electric Kane looks taller to jbl then undertaker does. jbl 6'5. taker 6'8.. kane 6'8'5 jbl 6'5 makes sense
Marotte said on 24/Mar/09
undertaker 6'7.5" akebono 6'8.25" sounds fair.
undertaker 6'7.5" akebono 6'8.25" sounds fair.
Anonymous said on 24/Mar/09
Im sorry but most of the peak heights are wrong on this website.
Im sorry but most of the peak heights are wrong on this website.
Chuck said on 24/Mar/09
Click Here Here, there's a pretty close staredown between Undertaker and Diesel (also known as Kevin Nash). Diesel probably has about two inches on Taker here...keep in mind, Diesel is between 6'10 and 6'11 (his height too was overstated, as he was typically introduced as 7 feet).
So if Diesel's 6'10-6'11 and has two inches on Taker, I reckon that puts Taker in the neighborhood of 6'8-6'9.
Click Here Here, there's a pretty close staredown between Undertaker and Diesel (also known as Kevin Nash). Diesel probably has about two inches on Taker here...keep in mind, Diesel is between 6'10 and 6'11 (his height too was overstated, as he was typically introduced as 7 feet).
So if Diesel's 6'10-6'11 and has two inches on Taker, I reckon that puts Taker in the neighborhood of 6'8-6'9.
nick said on 23/Mar/09
sid definetly was a solid 6'7 during their encounters and taker 6'8.
sid definetly was a solid 6'7 during their encounters and taker 6'8.
Danimal said on 23/Mar/09
JT says on 22/Mar/09
Click Here So if Taker is at least 6'9" here (he must be as his boots are chunky), 6'6" Albert must be wearing three inch lifts (and somehow can still perform running kicks in them). Just like the Khali staredown, something doesn't add up, unless Albert is really over 6'7" himself.
That would put Kevin Nash at 6'11"-7'0" BAREFEET seeing Nash had an easy 4" on Albert in a recent staredown and we know that Nash is MAX 6'10", so Albert is MAX 6'6" and imo Taker is wearing some seriously THICK/CHUNKY boots with JBL.
JT says on 22/Mar/09
Click Here So if Taker is at least 6'9" here (he must be as his boots are chunky), 6'6" Albert must be wearing three inch lifts (and somehow can still perform running kicks in them). Just like the Khali staredown, something doesn't add up, unless Albert is really over 6'7" himself.
That would put Kevin Nash at 6'11"-7'0" BAREFEET seeing Nash had an easy 4" on Albert in a recent staredown and we know that Nash is MAX 6'10", so Albert is MAX 6'6" and imo Taker is wearing some seriously THICK/CHUNKY boots with JBL.
Red said on 23/Mar/09
Akebono is 1 inch taller than Taker imo
Akebono is 1 inch taller than Taker imo
Ray said on 23/Mar/09
Albert for sure had an advantage over Taker's boots. Albert is probably around 6'8" in those chunky boots while Taker is close to 6'9" in his. Albert has his head tilted up just a little bit more than Taker too. Taker edged Albert out by .5" and Albert had I'd say definite 1" advantage over Taker's boots. So Albert 6'6" and Taker 6'7.5" if Albert obnly has 1" advantage over Taker's boots. Albert looked to have the same boots with Taker that he has with Akebono. Look at Albert's knees in the Akebono pic. Aside from the thick heel, I wouldn;t be surprised if he has some inside help as well. Akebono may have Taker by .5"; who knows.
Albert for sure had an advantage over Taker's boots. Albert is probably around 6'8" in those chunky boots while Taker is close to 6'9" in his. Albert has his head tilted up just a little bit more than Taker too. Taker edged Albert out by .5" and Albert had I'd say definite 1" advantage over Taker's boots. So Albert 6'6" and Taker 6'7.5" if Albert obnly has 1" advantage over Taker's boots. Albert looked to have the same boots with Taker that he has with Akebono. Look at Albert's knees in the Akebono pic. Aside from the thick heel, I wouldn;t be surprised if he has some inside help as well. Akebono may have Taker by .5"; who knows.
hs2009 said on 23/Mar/09
Taker wore really flat boots back in 1996, making JBL look closer in height than he really was. I think JBL & Taker wear pretty similar boots today, hence the difference being larger.
Taker wore really flat boots back in 1996, making JBL look closer in height than he really was. I think JBL & Taker wear pretty similar boots today, hence the difference being larger.
KingNick said on 22/Mar/09
I'll be flat honest, as I was saying before, UT definitely has a footwear advantage in that pic. But I do think barefoot he's the taller of the two anyway. Plus UT is actually standing up straight in that pic.
I'll be flat honest, as I was saying before, UT definitely has a footwear advantage in that pic. But I do think barefoot he's the taller of the two anyway. Plus UT is actually standing up straight in that pic.
JT said on 22/Mar/09
Click Here So if Taker is at least 6'9" here (he must be as his boots are chunky), 6'6" Albert must be wearing three inch lifts (and somehow can still perform running kicks in them). Just like the Khali staredown, something doesn't add up, unless Albert is really over 6'7" himself.
Keep this in mind as well Click Here 6'8" Akebono has thin-soled boots on and looks like he would be at least at inch taller than Taker.
Click Here So if Taker is at least 6'9" here (he must be as his boots are chunky), 6'6" Albert must be wearing three inch lifts (and somehow can still perform running kicks in them). Just like the Khali staredown, something doesn't add up, unless Albert is really over 6'7" himself.
Keep this in mind as well Click Here 6'8" Akebono has thin-soled boots on and looks like he would be at least at inch taller than Taker.
Clay said on 22/Mar/09
There is a picture of Taker and Bradshaw and someone else backstage in dress shoes and Mark has JBL by 3 inches there too.
There is a picture of Taker and Bradshaw and someone else backstage in dress shoes and Mark has JBL by 3 inches there too.
Shock of Electric said on 22/Mar/09
Vegas, what do you mean Sid didn't have as much height on JBL in 96 as Taker now? Did you mean to say Taker? Sid should have about 1" less, and barefoot, possibly 1.5" less. In their staredown from '96 you can see Sid has about 2" on JBL. I'm trying to find some clear shots of Sid's early 90s footwear because there's a chance Sid has always been consistent with his internal lifts the entire time. In the WM13 staredown you can clearly see that his boots are the same thickness for the heel as Taker's, but the back part of the heel of his foot is a bit higher where it turns into the ankle. I'd say there's a good chance Sid is 1.25-1.5" shorter than Taker barefoot but I still don't think Sid is quite as low as 6'6.5"
Vegas, what do you mean Sid didn't have as much height on JBL in 96 as Taker now? Did you mean to say Taker? Sid should have about 1" less, and barefoot, possibly 1.5" less. In their staredown from '96 you can see Sid has about 2" on JBL. I'm trying to find some clear shots of Sid's early 90s footwear because there's a chance Sid has always been consistent with his internal lifts the entire time. In the WM13 staredown you can clearly see that his boots are the same thickness for the heel as Taker's, but the back part of the heel of his foot is a bit higher where it turns into the ankle. I'd say there's a good chance Sid is 1.25-1.5" shorter than Taker barefoot but I still don't think Sid is quite as low as 6'6.5"
Danimal said on 22/Mar/09
Taker's boots are VERY suspect though. They are looking chunkier than ever before.
Taker's boots are VERY suspect though. They are looking chunkier than ever before.
Big Show said on 22/Mar/09
Click Here
Here's a tag-team match between Kane/Undertaker vs. Rikishi/Haku. In the end there's a backstage segment where Kane and Undertaker stand next to each other.
Click Here
Here's a tag-team match between Kane/Undertaker vs. Rikishi/Haku. In the end there's a backstage segment where Kane and Undertaker stand next to each other.
Shock of Electric said on 22/Mar/09
I always hate generic even number listings from old stats. This site more often than not goes to the quarter inch and we have no idea if whoever prints any stats is an up or down rounder, or if they even were presented with an exact height. JBL compared to the 6'5" army general comes out about 6'5.25" and we don't know the footwear. He could be less or more but the 25 in my eye stands for now.
I always hate generic even number listings from old stats. This site more often than not goes to the quarter inch and we have no idea if whoever prints any stats is an up or down rounder, or if they even were presented with an exact height. JBL compared to the 6'5" army general comes out about 6'5.25" and we don't know the footwear. He could be less or more but the 25 in my eye stands for now.
Ray said on 22/Mar/09
Taker has 3" on JBL from what I've seen through the years. Taker was wearing his normal flats on SMackdown and I think tyhe difference was JBL had pretty flat ones on too unlike other times, plus Taker stood up straight for a second before he hit him. Before Taker stood straight, it looked less than the 3" he really has on him.
Taker has 3" on JBL from what I've seen through the years. Taker was wearing his normal flats on SMackdown and I think tyhe difference was JBL had pretty flat ones on too unlike other times, plus Taker stood up straight for a second before he hit him. Before Taker stood straight, it looked less than the 3" he really has on him.
Red said on 22/Mar/09
I think JBL was a Liftwearer, he was much closer to Taker in other matches.
Can
I think JBL was a Liftwearer, he was much closer to Taker in other matches.
Can
Rantsrob said on 22/Mar/09
Wasn't jbl a confirmed 6'5'' from nfl? Taker is looking quite tall next to jbl.
Wasn't jbl a confirmed 6'5'' from nfl? Taker is looking quite tall next to jbl.
nick said on 21/Mar/09
wow i actually cant believe he is that much taller than jbl. taker amazes me. His height is great to debate, that picture throws 6'6.5 away and is a plus for his 6'8 possibility
wow i actually cant believe he is that much taller than jbl. taker amazes me. His height is great to debate, that picture throws 6'6.5 away and is a plus for his 6'8 possibility
KingNick said on 21/Mar/09
Shock of Electric, you're right we did go into that, my bad :>)
And I agree, great pic with UT and JBL. I think in reality there's more like 2" or 2.5" between them, that looks like about 3" there. JBL is wearing flatter footwear these days.
I say JBL 6'5.5" - 6'6" and UT 6'8".
Shock of Electric, you're right we did go into that, my bad :>)
And I agree, great pic with UT and JBL. I think in reality there's more like 2" or 2.5" between them, that looks like about 3" there. JBL is wearing flatter footwear these days.
I say JBL 6'5.5" - 6'6" and UT 6'8".
hs2009 said on 21/Mar/09
Excellent pics SoE! Finally he stands up straight :D
Taker is still 6'8" today it would seem, as JBL is legit 6'5"-6'5.5" as we all saw with General Odierno.
Perhaps a tiny upgrade for Undertaker?
Excellent pics SoE! Finally he stands up straight :D
Taker is still 6'8" today it would seem, as JBL is legit 6'5"-6'5.5" as we all saw with General Odierno.
Perhaps a tiny upgrade for Undertaker?
tuga said on 21/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 21/Mar/09
Back on topic, Taker looking mighty tall with JBL from SD tonight: Click Here
Very nice pics, Jbl is at least 6'5 like we saw with the us army general, this pretty much throws away anything less than 6'8 today for taker...what a difference standing tall makes...
Shock of Electric says on 21/Mar/09
Back on topic, Taker looking mighty tall with JBL from SD tonight: Click Here
Very nice pics, Jbl is at least 6'5 like we saw with the us army general, this pretty much throws away anything less than 6'8 today for taker...what a difference standing tall makes...
Anonymous said on 21/Mar/09
Taker is looking a solid 3 inches taller than JBL there. They've both got pretty even posture and their feet are about the same distance apart.
Look how much JBL is having to look up at Taker.
Yet more proof that Taker is 6,8".
Taker is looking a solid 3 inches taller than JBL there. They've both got pretty even posture and their feet are about the same distance apart.
Look how much JBL is having to look up at Taker.
Yet more proof that Taker is 6,8".
mike said on 21/Mar/09
if jbl is 6'5" then take looks about 6'8" imo.
if jbl is 6'5" then take looks about 6'8" imo.
Shock of Electric said on 21/Mar/09
KingNick, I'm just a local indy guy in NJ, I thought I mentioned that before. I seem to remember you mentioning going to shows in the Point Pleasant area maybe? I believe I asked you if you were a worker or a photographer or anything like that. I've been doing shows since I was 16, starting in December '97. I'm not that active anymore but I'd like to be. Plenty of bookings just don't have the time or energy to make them.
Back on topic, Taker looking mighty tall with JBL from SD tonight: Click Here
KingNick, I'm just a local indy guy in NJ, I thought I mentioned that before. I seem to remember you mentioning going to shows in the Point Pleasant area maybe? I believe I asked you if you were a worker or a photographer or anything like that. I've been doing shows since I was 16, starting in December '97. I'm not that active anymore but I'd like to be. Plenty of bookings just don't have the time or energy to make them.
Back on topic, Taker looking mighty tall with JBL from SD tonight: Click Here
KingNick said on 19/Mar/09
Shock of Electric, you were in the wrestling business?
Shock of Electric, you were in the wrestling business?
Shock of Electric said on 19/Mar/09
The 6'10 1/2" bill came about by early 1991 and they were already calling him "almost 7 feet" from time to time. It was his set written bill fonce they fully established the character, and the commentators always fool around with the bills. Most commonly he was referred to as a generic 6'10" which they should have just gone with. The hazy 6'9" billing only lasted a few months.
Piper said right after Monsoon's "6'9, 6'10" comment, "6'10...I dunno it's hard to tell from here" which is weird because in later matches Piper stays away from the 6'10". In Takers's actual debut match, which was right before Survivor Series but aired later, McMahon says "Oh I dunno about 6 feet 10 inches" and later in the same match Honky Tonk Man directly contradicts him and says 6'9".
There's another match with Piper commentating where Taker's wrestling a jobber, and Piper calls him 6'5", lol. He also puts Sid at 6'7" in a side reference in the same match for whatever reason. In another jobber match from 1991, Piper puts him at 6'8". The inconsistency is really bewildering, he doesn't even get his weight bill correct right after the comment and Vince said it in the beginning of the match himself.
JR did however push that 6'10 1/2" bill constantly. He was always big on pushing bills for bigger guys, but sometimes he drops them down to a more reasonable height for no reason. He would say a guy's height 4 or 5 times a match if he was 6'5" bill or more.
I wouldn' put much faith in the WCWA bill. Territories and indys are so sketchy and chances are it was just a guess, much like the commentators were doing in the early 90s for Taker. Vince knew he wanted that 6'10" bill at that was that. Being in the business, I've seen so many off the wall height and weight bills, above and below actuality.
Men can very well grow up to age 21, but generally 16-17 is the cut off. I myself didn't reach my current height until age 20.
The 6'10 1/2" bill came about by early 1991 and they were already calling him "almost 7 feet" from time to time. It was his set written bill fonce they fully established the character, and the commentators always fool around with the bills. Most commonly he was referred to as a generic 6'10" which they should have just gone with. The hazy 6'9" billing only lasted a few months.
Piper said right after Monsoon's "6'9, 6'10" comment, "6'10...I dunno it's hard to tell from here" which is weird because in later matches Piper stays away from the 6'10". In Takers's actual debut match, which was right before Survivor Series but aired later, McMahon says "Oh I dunno about 6 feet 10 inches" and later in the same match Honky Tonk Man directly contradicts him and says 6'9".
There's another match with Piper commentating where Taker's wrestling a jobber, and Piper calls him 6'5", lol. He also puts Sid at 6'7" in a side reference in the same match for whatever reason. In another jobber match from 1991, Piper puts him at 6'8". The inconsistency is really bewildering, he doesn't even get his weight bill correct right after the comment and Vince said it in the beginning of the match himself.
JR did however push that 6'10 1/2" bill constantly. He was always big on pushing bills for bigger guys, but sometimes he drops them down to a more reasonable height for no reason. He would say a guy's height 4 or 5 times a match if he was 6'5" bill or more.
I wouldn' put much faith in the WCWA bill. Territories and indys are so sketchy and chances are it was just a guess, much like the commentators were doing in the early 90s for Taker. Vince knew he wanted that 6'10" bill at that was that. Being in the business, I've seen so many off the wall height and weight bills, above and below actuality.
Men can very well grow up to age 21, but generally 16-17 is the cut off. I myself didn't reach my current height until age 20.
KingNick said on 18/Mar/09
Big Show says on 18/Mar/09
Paul says on 18/Mar/09
How long ago was that though Big Show ? Remember it is possible for a man to grow up to the age of 30.
Are there any medical studies that can confirm that? Except for some people with a growth disorder I find it hard to believe that people can grow til they hit the age of 30. Most people stop growing between the age of 15-21.
Mark Calaway used the Punisher gimmick before he went to WCW so I would think it was 1989 (when he was 24 years old).
WCWA may have just billed him his actual height. Now I know I'll get legions of posters on here condemning me for saying that but it's certainly possible. Danimal posted a video a while ago of Sid being advertised as 6'7" when he first started wrestling (I don't remember if it was the NWA or AWA) and it's tough to argue that he's shorter than that (I know Rob has him as 6'6.5" but I think it's fair to say that the majority of posters on here agree that Sid is a minimum of 6'7", just see that page)
WCWA wasn't nearly as big as the WWF or the NWA/WCW. The latter two were smarter in their promotions in that they exaggerated the sizes of their wrestlers. But I do agree that if UT was announced as 6'8" in WCWA, he probably was never taller than that. I also haven't heard of men growing until 30, I think it's possible they can grow until they're 21 or 22 tho I have heard that somewhere.
Big Show says on 18/Mar/09
Paul says on 18/Mar/09
How long ago was that though Big Show ? Remember it is possible for a man to grow up to the age of 30.
Are there any medical studies that can confirm that? Except for some people with a growth disorder I find it hard to believe that people can grow til they hit the age of 30. Most people stop growing between the age of 15-21.
Mark Calaway used the Punisher gimmick before he went to WCW so I would think it was 1989 (when he was 24 years old).
WCWA may have just billed him his actual height. Now I know I'll get legions of posters on here condemning me for saying that but it's certainly possible. Danimal posted a video a while ago of Sid being advertised as 6'7" when he first started wrestling (I don't remember if it was the NWA or AWA) and it's tough to argue that he's shorter than that (I know Rob has him as 6'6.5" but I think it's fair to say that the majority of posters on here agree that Sid is a minimum of 6'7", just see that page)
WCWA wasn't nearly as big as the WWF or the NWA/WCW. The latter two were smarter in their promotions in that they exaggerated the sizes of their wrestlers. But I do agree that if UT was announced as 6'8" in WCWA, he probably was never taller than that. I also haven't heard of men growing until 30, I think it's possible they can grow until they're 21 or 22 tho I have heard that somewhere.
Paul said on 18/Mar/09
Yes it is possible in terms of fractions of an inch. In Calaway's case this could in theory have meant growing from just over 6'8 at say age 24 or 25 to 6'8.5-7 at 30. Yeah some people do stop at 21 some less. Genetics mainly.
Personally I reached 6'2.5 at 29 six years ago and was 6'2 flat at 24.
Yes it is possible in terms of fractions of an inch. In Calaway's case this could in theory have meant growing from just over 6'8 at say age 24 or 25 to 6'8.5-7 at 30. Yeah some people do stop at 21 some less. Genetics mainly.
Personally I reached 6'2.5 at 29 six years ago and was 6'2 flat at 24.
Big Show said on 18/Mar/09
Paul says on 18/Mar/09
How long ago was that though Big Show ? Remember it is possible for a man to grow up to the age of 30.
Are there any medical studies that can confirm that? Except for some people with a growth disorder I find it hard to believe that people can grow til they hit the age of 30. Most people stop growing between the age of 15-21.
Mark Calaway used the Punisher gimmick before he went to WCW so I would think it was 1989 (when he was 24 years old).
Paul says on 18/Mar/09
How long ago was that though Big Show ? Remember it is possible for a man to grow up to the age of 30.
Are there any medical studies that can confirm that? Except for some people with a growth disorder I find it hard to believe that people can grow til they hit the age of 30. Most people stop growing between the age of 15-21.
Mark Calaway used the Punisher gimmick before he went to WCW so I would think it was 1989 (when he was 24 years old).
Paul said on 18/Mar/09
Big Show says on 17/Mar/09
When Undertaker was wrestling as the Punisher in WCWA he was billed at 6'8. I doubt he was taller than that.
How long ago was that though Big Show ? Remember it is possible for a man to grow up to the age of 30.
Big Show says on 17/Mar/09
When Undertaker was wrestling as the Punisher in WCWA he was billed at 6'8. I doubt he was taller than that.
How long ago was that though Big Show ? Remember it is possible for a man to grow up to the age of 30.
KingNick said on 17/Mar/09
Mark Calloway 6'8" in WCWA. In WCW he was typically billed as 6'9". In his first two years in the WWF they refered to him interchangably between 6'9" and 6'10". Just watch his debut match on youtube, Monsoon says, "328lbs, looks to be about 6'9", 6'10" somewhere in that neighborhood" I think they started refering to him as 6'10" consistantly when he fueded with Giant Gonzalez (probably IMO to make put Gonzalez's size over more) and around then I think JR threw in the 6'10 1/2" bill that stuck for so many years.
Mark Calloway 6'8" in WCWA. In WCW he was typically billed as 6'9". In his first two years in the WWF they refered to him interchangably between 6'9" and 6'10". Just watch his debut match on youtube, Monsoon says, "328lbs, looks to be about 6'9", 6'10" somewhere in that neighborhood" I think they started refering to him as 6'10" consistantly when he fueded with Giant Gonzalez (probably IMO to make put Gonzalez's size over more) and around then I think JR threw in the 6'10 1/2" bill that stuck for so many years.
Alex said on 16/Mar/09
UT was billed at 6'10.5 but they said 6'10 a lot. When he first came they even said 6'9-6'10. Here and there they'd say 6'11-7'0. 328lbs was his billed weight for over a decade which he looked around give or take some pounds. Then was billed at 305 when he did lose a bit of weight but now is billed at 299lbs but is way less than that it appears. I could go as low as 260lbs for him today IMO.
UT was billed at 6'10.5 but they said 6'10 a lot. When he first came they even said 6'9-6'10. Here and there they'd say 6'11-7'0. 328lbs was his billed weight for over a decade which he looked around give or take some pounds. Then was billed at 305 when he did lose a bit of weight but now is billed at 299lbs but is way less than that it appears. I could go as low as 260lbs for him today IMO.
nick said on 16/Mar/09
here is a possibility, they use to bill him at 6'10 and a half. I can be possible that he was 6'8 and a half and they just gave him two inches. They do seem to bill wrestlers a full two inches past their real height, batista billed at 6'6, angle billed at 6 feet, big show at 1 point 7'2 khali 7'3 etc. there are exceptions to the rule like randy orton actually being 6'4 but it s possible that they maybe saw a physical that he was 6'8.5 so they bumbed him up two inches in the early 90's or they asked "how tall are you mark?" and he responded "6'8.5" and they said ok were going to bill you 6'10.5
here is a possibility, they use to bill him at 6'10 and a half. I can be possible that he was 6'8 and a half and they just gave him two inches. They do seem to bill wrestlers a full two inches past their real height, batista billed at 6'6, angle billed at 6 feet, big show at 1 point 7'2 khali 7'3 etc. there are exceptions to the rule like randy orton actually being 6'4 but it s possible that they maybe saw a physical that he was 6'8.5 so they bumbed him up two inches in the early 90's or they asked "how tall are you mark?" and he responded "6'8.5" and they said ok were going to bill you 6'10.5
Shock of Electric said on 15/Mar/09
The 328 lb bill did go from 91 to about 2002, so that is a long time. There was a small frame of time they dropped the .5" off his written height bill but it's always been mentioned verbally the entire 18+ years
The 328 lb bill did go from 91 to about 2002, so that is a long time. There was a small frame of time they dropped the .5" off his written height bill but it's always been mentioned verbally the entire 18+ years
general93 said on 15/Mar/09
mk the word mostly means most the time if he wrestled from 1990-current in wwe and was billed 6'10.5 328lbs for13-14years thats MOSTLY
mk the word mostly means most the time if he wrestled from 1990-current in wwe and was billed 6'10.5 328lbs for13-14years thats MOSTLY
Shock of Electric said on 14/Mar/09
He's not under 6'8" to this day, there's no way.
He's not under 6'8" to this day, there's no way.
MK said on 14/Mar/09
general93 says on 13/Mar/09
undertaker is mostly billed 6'10.5" 328lbs.
Wake up man, that was AT LEAST 6 years ago. He has'nt been billed over 300lbs for a couple years now, 299lbs is the current billing. He WAS a strong 6'7'' back in the 90's, now is a weak 6'7'' AT BEST imo.
general93 says on 13/Mar/09
undertaker is mostly billed 6'10.5" 328lbs.
Wake up man, that was AT LEAST 6 years ago. He has'nt been billed over 300lbs for a couple years now, 299lbs is the current billing. He WAS a strong 6'7'' back in the 90's, now is a weak 6'7'' AT BEST imo.
general93 said on 13/Mar/09
undertaker is mostly billed 6'10.5" 328lbs.i think he is 6'8".maybe early 90s 6'9"
undertaker is mostly billed 6'10.5" 328lbs.i think he is 6'8".maybe early 90s 6'9"
Shock of Electric said on 12/Mar/09
I only started becoming a fan of Orton in the last few months, and mostly due to his character. Triple H I only ever appreciate in his DX mode, otherwise I can't stand the character he portrays because personally I don't feel he backs it up with a solid in ring performance. He can tell a good story in the ring, but physically he has to play every move so safely it looks fake. I assume this is to avoid injury, as he is prone to it. I hope all the big matches are well presented, but yes, Undertaker-Michaels 1 on 1 has a lot to live up to, it's a shame it had to come over 11 years since the last one with both men approach their mid 40s, but better late than never as they have been my favorites for the last 20 years or so.
I only started becoming a fan of Orton in the last few months, and mostly due to his character. Triple H I only ever appreciate in his DX mode, otherwise I can't stand the character he portrays because personally I don't feel he backs it up with a solid in ring performance. He can tell a good story in the ring, but physically he has to play every move so safely it looks fake. I assume this is to avoid injury, as he is prone to it. I hope all the big matches are well presented, but yes, Undertaker-Michaels 1 on 1 has a lot to live up to, it's a shame it had to come over 11 years since the last one with both men approach their mid 40s, but better late than never as they have been my favorites for the last 20 years or so.
KingNick said on 12/Mar/09
Nice analysis, shock. I agree too. And I loved that segment on Raw btw, that match has the potential to steal the show. Though I have to admit I think the HHH / Orton match is going to be really really good.
Nice analysis, shock. I agree too. And I loved that segment on Raw btw, that match has the potential to steal the show. Though I have to admit I think the HHH / Orton match is going to be really really good.
Shock of Electric said on 12/Mar/09
nick, I went through your photobucket, good shots in there. I saw one where you compared Big Show and Khali staredowns with Taker using the same camera angle, and it should be noted that Taker's boots in the staredown with Big Show are about a half inch less than the ones he wears now, on top of that, Big Show's boots are and were always at least .25" more than Khali's. Big Show basically 1" shorter than Khali as of that pic from 1999, and possibly closer to 2" shorter now, regardless he's about 3.25" taller than Undertaker currently, maybe 3.75" legit back then. The comparison looks about 4.5", which is about how much shorter he is than Khali, maybe up to 4.75".
The shot with Hogan and Taker, at a significant head lean he's as much taller than Hogan as he was standing up straight in 1991, I believe he was 2.5" taller in '91 and 4.5" taller than Hogan by 2002.
The shots of Triple H definitely show he is closer to 6'3" than 6'2".
nick, I went through your photobucket, good shots in there. I saw one where you compared Big Show and Khali staredowns with Taker using the same camera angle, and it should be noted that Taker's boots in the staredown with Big Show are about a half inch less than the ones he wears now, on top of that, Big Show's boots are and were always at least .25" more than Khali's. Big Show basically 1" shorter than Khali as of that pic from 1999, and possibly closer to 2" shorter now, regardless he's about 3.25" taller than Undertaker currently, maybe 3.75" legit back then. The comparison looks about 4.5", which is about how much shorter he is than Khali, maybe up to 4.75".
The shot with Hogan and Taker, at a significant head lean he's as much taller than Hogan as he was standing up straight in 1991, I believe he was 2.5" taller in '91 and 4.5" taller than Hogan by 2002.
The shots of Triple H definitely show he is closer to 6'3" than 6'2".
Clay said on 11/Mar/09
Undertaker was hunching like a mother ****er (as always) conversing with a much shorter man like Michaels. Standing straight there you really can see the height difference.
Undertaker was hunching like a mother ****er (as always) conversing with a much shorter man like Michaels. Standing straight there you really can see the height difference.
mike said on 11/Mar/09
taker does look around 6'7".
taker does look around 6'7".
Red said on 11/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 11/Mar/09 ....
I think 8 inches between them is correct, 5
Shock of Electric says on 11/Mar/09 ....
I think 8 inches between them is correct, 5
nick said on 11/Mar/09
good stuff electric, taker with loose posture is 6'6 but if he were to be measured he would stand straight and be between 6'7-6'8. Electric take a look at my photobucket just scroll down a bit, it seems now the taker page has now recruited some more guys to defend his given height, i think taker has the most interesting height because he really fluctuates so much. Taker is thhe only guy who can say hes between 6 and 7 feet if you asked his height. Im still fighting for him to be 6'8.
good stuff electric, taker with loose posture is 6'6 but if he were to be measured he would stand straight and be between 6'7-6'8. Electric take a look at my photobucket just scroll down a bit, it seems now the taker page has now recruited some more guys to defend his given height, i think taker has the most interesting height because he really fluctuates so much. Taker is thhe only guy who can say hes between 6 and 7 feet if you asked his height. Im still fighting for him to be 6'8.
Shock of Electric said on 11/Mar/09
For the heck of it while watching the Taker/Michaels face to face, I decided to do a comparison. From across the ring Taker is standing straight up in a situation with someone shorter than him, which is rare, and comes out what I thought was about 8" taller than Michaels, who by this site is listed 5'11.5" (which I agree) compared to someone else claiming to be that same height. That would coincide with the 6'7.'5". When Taker and Michaels get face to face, the difference drops down to about 6" but we all know is impossible, but that's because of Taker's posturing when close.
In any event, assuming Michaels in his Tim's or whatever type of workboot he has on, is 6'1", pixel converting Shawn's height in the boots, dividing Taker's by it, then multiplying Shawn's height in the boots (6'1") puts Taker at 6'9.1-.3" when including a margin for error at .25". Using nearly 5 pixels per inch allows to work to 1/4" since we need at least 4. In order for Taker to be 6'8.5-.75" in his wrestling boots, Michaels would have to be 6' even or less in his work boots which I don't thnk is possible.
Click Here
It should also be noted Taker's at nearly a shoulder width stance which can cut out as much as a half inch, in his case probably a little more, and Michaels' feet are pretty close together but he is standing a bit more casually. Regardless, it's rare to get a full body shot of two people who are essentially equal distance from the camera, on a level plane, without a "high" or "low" angle skewing the difference, and with decent quality to work with. Take a look, see what you guys come up with if it's worth it.
For the heck of it while watching the Taker/Michaels face to face, I decided to do a comparison. From across the ring Taker is standing straight up in a situation with someone shorter than him, which is rare, and comes out what I thought was about 8" taller than Michaels, who by this site is listed 5'11.5" (which I agree) compared to someone else claiming to be that same height. That would coincide with the 6'7.'5". When Taker and Michaels get face to face, the difference drops down to about 6" but we all know is impossible, but that's because of Taker's posturing when close.
In any event, assuming Michaels in his Tim's or whatever type of workboot he has on, is 6'1", pixel converting Shawn's height in the boots, dividing Taker's by it, then multiplying Shawn's height in the boots (6'1") puts Taker at 6'9.1-.3" when including a margin for error at .25". Using nearly 5 pixels per inch allows to work to 1/4" since we need at least 4. In order for Taker to be 6'8.5-.75" in his wrestling boots, Michaels would have to be 6' even or less in his work boots which I don't thnk is possible.
Click Here
It should also be noted Taker's at nearly a shoulder width stance which can cut out as much as a half inch, in his case probably a little more, and Michaels' feet are pretty close together but he is standing a bit more casually. Regardless, it's rare to get a full body shot of two people who are essentially equal distance from the camera, on a level plane, without a "high" or "low" angle skewing the difference, and with decent quality to work with. Take a look, see what you guys come up with if it's worth it.
hs2009 said on 10/Mar/09
Here's a photo of Undertaker stood up straight with Batista. He's a bit closer to the camera but even taking that into account, he still towers a man who's legit 6'3" IMO.
Click Here
Here's a photo of Undertaker stood up straight with Batista. He's a bit closer to the camera but even taking that into account, he still towers a man who's legit 6'3" IMO.
Click Here
Shock of Electric said on 10/Mar/09
Austin and Vince in fair comparison with Taker come up to roughly his nose, there's about a 7" difference between them. In the backstage clip with Austin and Debra, the camera is drastically tilted in Austin's favor and Austin's head is leaning all the way back making his eyes higher. If you straighten in up, they look like this:
Click Here - with the tilt, Austin appears about 3" taller than normal by comparison, with fixed tilt about 2" taller.
Both Austin and Vince are at least 6'1" although Vince could be shrinking by now. Nick I also agree Batista is as tall as 6'3.5". Triple tonight in the incident with Randy Orton after RAW was coming very close to touching what was probably a 6'6" doorway, so he was over 6'4" in the boots he had on, which means, he's probably closer to 6'3" than 6'2". I say this also because for whatever reason Goldberg is listed as being taller than Triple here, but again, Triple H is taller than Goldberg.
There is a good staredown with them where they come out about the same height, Goldberg probably not even 1/4" taller if you take away Trip's hair, however Goldberg is in cowboy boots and Triple H is in dress shoes, so therefore...Triple H is slightly taller. Goldberg as tall as 6'2.5", I agree, but Triple H, nearly 6'3", which can be seen in the staredown in their match.
Getting back to Taker's height, looking at the pic with Frank on this page, Frank wouldn't even come up to Taker's mouth if he was standing up straight, it's not like he can't do that. Austin's mug shot suggests his head is 10" tall, which isn't at all impossible for a man 6'1-2", and Taker's head is bigger than Austin's by a solid inch. This means there would be more than 8" between Frank and Undertaker, or for that matter, Shawn Michaels and Undertaker which is apparent.
Austin and Vince in fair comparison with Taker come up to roughly his nose, there's about a 7" difference between them. In the backstage clip with Austin and Debra, the camera is drastically tilted in Austin's favor and Austin's head is leaning all the way back making his eyes higher. If you straighten in up, they look like this:
Click Here - with the tilt, Austin appears about 3" taller than normal by comparison, with fixed tilt about 2" taller.
Both Austin and Vince are at least 6'1" although Vince could be shrinking by now. Nick I also agree Batista is as tall as 6'3.5". Triple tonight in the incident with Randy Orton after RAW was coming very close to touching what was probably a 6'6" doorway, so he was over 6'4" in the boots he had on, which means, he's probably closer to 6'3" than 6'2". I say this also because for whatever reason Goldberg is listed as being taller than Triple here, but again, Triple H is taller than Goldberg.
There is a good staredown with them where they come out about the same height, Goldberg probably not even 1/4" taller if you take away Trip's hair, however Goldberg is in cowboy boots and Triple H is in dress shoes, so therefore...Triple H is slightly taller. Goldberg as tall as 6'2.5", I agree, but Triple H, nearly 6'3", which can be seen in the staredown in their match.
Getting back to Taker's height, looking at the pic with Frank on this page, Frank wouldn't even come up to Taker's mouth if he was standing up straight, it's not like he can't do that. Austin's mug shot suggests his head is 10" tall, which isn't at all impossible for a man 6'1-2", and Taker's head is bigger than Austin's by a solid inch. This means there would be more than 8" between Frank and Undertaker, or for that matter, Shawn Michaels and Undertaker which is apparent.
Da Man said on 9/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 9/Mar/09
"Even being closer to the camera, you can still see they are the same height. Compared to say Sid, who has a relatively small forehead for such a tall person, Taker comes out a full inch taller than him in the end, even being eye level and shoulder to shoulder. With Glen, his eyes are above Taker's, yet he is the same height when Glen's only got a fraction of an inch boot advantage as opposed to 1.25" from the late 90s. Taker = Glen + 0.25"
I can see no boot advantage for Yankem, whatsoever. I'm beginning to see a trend here, manipulate the numbers to keep Taker teller. I'm entertained, at the least.
I'm trying to find Yankem's boot advantage, but I just don't see it:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Shock of Electric says on 9/Mar/09
"Even being closer to the camera, you can still see they are the same height. Compared to say Sid, who has a relatively small forehead for such a tall person, Taker comes out a full inch taller than him in the end, even being eye level and shoulder to shoulder. With Glen, his eyes are above Taker's, yet he is the same height when Glen's only got a fraction of an inch boot advantage as opposed to 1.25" from the late 90s. Taker = Glen + 0.25"
I can see no boot advantage for Yankem, whatsoever. I'm beginning to see a trend here, manipulate the numbers to keep Taker teller. I'm entertained, at the least.
I'm trying to find Yankem's boot advantage, but I just don't see it:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
nick said on 9/Mar/09
we all saw that vid sid. how about you look at this vid Click Here look in the beggining the first second he is standing fairly* straight but if he stood straight looking up at vince he probobly can go near another inch, pause at 42 seconds, he looks atleast 6 inches taller than vnce. Then all of a sudden when thery cut close and he is leaning in he looks short like in the austin vid. I already posted a vid with taker and austin in the middle of the ring which is wayyy more reliable then a backstage spot and taker was almost 7 inches taller.
ooo look taker looking "suprisling tall nex" to vince Click Here
Here is a two way video, Undertaker looks really short next to 6'3 6'3.5 (in my opinion) batista the whole video until when the best source of height evidence comes at the end**. Click Here pause at 13:49 now you can see taker is clearly near 5inches taller especially if he stoody straighter looking up like he did with khali
sorry sid i spell things wrong two
we all saw that vid sid. how about you look at this vid Click Here look in the beggining the first second he is standing fairly* straight but if he stood straight looking up at vince he probobly can go near another inch, pause at 42 seconds, he looks atleast 6 inches taller than vnce. Then all of a sudden when thery cut close and he is leaning in he looks short like in the austin vid. I already posted a vid with taker and austin in the middle of the ring which is wayyy more reliable then a backstage spot and taker was almost 7 inches taller.
ooo look taker looking "suprisling tall nex" to vince Click Here
Here is a two way video, Undertaker looks really short next to 6'3 6'3.5 (in my opinion) batista the whole video until when the best source of height evidence comes at the end**. Click Here pause at 13:49 now you can see taker is clearly near 5inches taller especially if he stoody straighter looking up like he did with khali
sorry sid i spell things wrong two
sid said on 9/Mar/09
Today kane would have taker 5cm..I think kane shrunk atleast 5cm from 6'8'5 to 6'8, taker shrunk to you can tell, he was 6'8, now he's probably 6;7;5
Today kane would have taker 5cm..I think kane shrunk atleast 5cm from 6'8'5 to 6'8, taker shrunk to you can tell, he was 6'8, now he's probably 6;7;5
Shock of Electric said on 9/Mar/09
Da Man, you even quoted me as saying "more" forehead, and in the Yankem staredown he's closer to the camera by **inches**. Even being closer to the camera, you can still see they are the same height. Compared to say Sid, who has a relatively small forehead for such a tall person, Taker comes out a full inch taller than him in the end, even being eye level and shoulder to shoulder. With Glen, his eyes are above Taker's, yet he is the same height when Glen's only got a fraction of an inch boot advantage as opposed to 1.25" from the late 90s. Taker = Glen + 0.25"
Click Here This is a pic I put together showing a couple things, to show why the angles from the exclusive footage of RR07 are bad for height comparison since they swap height advantage any time the camera moves or tilts, and obviously the boot difference. Kane looks at times 1" taller than Taker when the camera is actually tilted in his favor, but then suddely they are the same height, and there is another tilt where Taker looks taller but obviously it's in his favor. The boot comparison is to show that clearly Taker has boots that are at thinner than Kane's. Also remember, that in the late 90s, Kane's boots were even bigger, and Taker's were smaller than their current standards. This bridged the gap in their height.
I also made another post about Brody that didn't seem to get through, that he was billed as tall as 6'8", and he was taller than Jeep Swenson by at least 2". There's no way he was under 6'5", Stan "the God" Hansen's word or not.
Da Man, you even quoted me as saying "more" forehead, and in the Yankem staredown he's closer to the camera by **inches**. Even being closer to the camera, you can still see they are the same height. Compared to say Sid, who has a relatively small forehead for such a tall person, Taker comes out a full inch taller than him in the end, even being eye level and shoulder to shoulder. With Glen, his eyes are above Taker's, yet he is the same height when Glen's only got a fraction of an inch boot advantage as opposed to 1.25" from the late 90s. Taker = Glen + 0.25"
Click Here This is a pic I put together showing a couple things, to show why the angles from the exclusive footage of RR07 are bad for height comparison since they swap height advantage any time the camera moves or tilts, and obviously the boot difference. Kane looks at times 1" taller than Taker when the camera is actually tilted in his favor, but then suddely they are the same height, and there is another tilt where Taker looks taller but obviously it's in his favor. The boot comparison is to show that clearly Taker has boots that are at thinner than Kane's. Also remember, that in the late 90s, Kane's boots were even bigger, and Taker's were smaller than their current standards. This bridged the gap in their height.
I also made another post about Brody that didn't seem to get through, that he was billed as tall as 6'8", and he was taller than Jeep Swenson by at least 2". There's no way he was under 6'5", Stan "the God" Hansen's word or not.
sid said on 9/Mar/09
Shock of Electric cam angle that made taker look taller, I seen kane and taker and nash in street cloth, kane edged taker atleast a inch... kane was wearing sneakers, taker in his dress shoes type rugged
Shock of Electric cam angle that made taker look taller, I seen kane and taker and nash in street cloth, kane edged taker atleast a inch... kane was wearing sneakers, taker in his dress shoes type rugged
sid said on 9/Mar/09
Ray Thats funny, Glenn jacobs college stats has him at 6'8 when I saw kane and taker in 1998 and 2000 I saw kane and taker and nash one coming out one after each other before and after the event. kane looked a inch taller, nash being a inch taller then kane. 98 i saw kane and taker getting out the same car, there where side by side getting there bags in the trunk, kane looked taller, 2000 or 2001 again saw taker kane, before the event and after kane still had a inch, nash had a inch.. after the show i saw kane, jbl, hardcore holly, jeff jerett in a resturant.. kane was the tallest person i seen, till i saw big show....i beg the differ kane being 6'7 and shorter.
Ray Thats funny, Glenn jacobs college stats has him at 6'8 when I saw kane and taker in 1998 and 2000 I saw kane and taker and nash one coming out one after each other before and after the event. kane looked a inch taller, nash being a inch taller then kane. 98 i saw kane and taker getting out the same car, there where side by side getting there bags in the trunk, kane looked taller, 2000 or 2001 again saw taker kane, before the event and after kane still had a inch, nash had a inch.. after the show i saw kane, jbl, hardcore holly, jeff jerett in a resturant.. kane was the tallest person i seen, till i saw big show....i beg the differ kane being 6'7 and shorter.
sid said on 9/Mar/09
Heres undertaker looking suprisling short nex to steve austin in the clip...Click Here
Heres undertaker looking suprisling short nex to steve austin in the clip...Click Here
hs2009 said on 9/Mar/09
Thanks Big Show! Haha, Buchanan went through quite a few gimmick changes in his career :D
Cheers Danimal, I wasn't sure about Brody's billings. I thought he may have been billed at 6'8" but couldn't remember. How tall do you think he was legit?
Thanks Big Show! Haha, Buchanan went through quite a few gimmick changes in his career :D
Cheers Danimal, I wasn't sure about Brody's billings. I thought he may have been billed at 6'8" but couldn't remember. How tall do you think he was legit?
Danimal said on 8/Mar/09
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
Brody's billings were all over the place, I think he was billed as high as 6'7" at one point. Mayeb higher, I'm not sure.
He's been billed as high as 6'8" and as low as 6'6".
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
Brody's billings were all over the place, I think he was billed as high as 6'7" at one point. Mayeb higher, I'm not sure.
He's been billed as high as 6'8" and as low as 6'6".
Da Man said on 8/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 6/Mar/09
"Da Man, Taker has more forehead than Yankem, his head is bigger than Yankem's in general and his eyes are more centered, so it is an illusion of him being shorter there based on eye level. The pic is cut off at the very top of Yankem's head, and more of Taker's is missing."
More of Taker's head is missing because he is **Closer To The Camera**.
Where is Taker's massive forehead advantage here (keep in mind that I'm not denying he has a one, just that's it's very slight):
Click Here
Click Here
Shock of Electric says on 6/Mar/09
"Da Man, Taker has more forehead than Yankem, his head is bigger than Yankem's in general and his eyes are more centered, so it is an illusion of him being shorter there based on eye level. The pic is cut off at the very top of Yankem's head, and more of Taker's is missing."
More of Taker's head is missing because he is **Closer To The Camera**.
Where is Taker's massive forehead advantage here (keep in mind that I'm not denying he has a one, just that's it's very slight):
Click Here
Click Here
Shock of Electric said on 8/Mar/09
Brody was taller than Jeep Swenson by probably 2". Brody was also billed as tall as 6'8" and I don't see him any less than 6'5". Also the Berzerker was a straight rip off of Brody by the WWF, but at the same time an homage to him from Nord.
Brody was taller than Jeep Swenson by probably 2". Brody was also billed as tall as 6'8" and I don't see him any less than 6'5". Also the Berzerker was a straight rip off of Brody by the WWF, but at the same time an homage to him from Nord.
Big Show said on 8/Mar/09
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
Is that Bull Buchanan on the far left of that picture Vegas posted?
Yes it is! He was wrestling as part of the Truth Comission under the name Recon.
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
Is that Bull Buchanan on the far left of that picture Vegas posted?
Yes it is! He was wrestling as part of the Truth Comission under the name Recon.
hs2009 said on 8/Mar/09
Is that Bull Buchanan on the far left of that picture Vegas posted?
Is that Bull Buchanan on the far left of that picture Vegas posted?
Vegas said on 8/Mar/09
if memory serves me correct brody was shorter than Robert Swenson who he feuded with in WCCW, swenson if you recall played Bane in batman and robin film and was billed at 6'4 and 6'5
Ray; a couple of wrestlers have used the name Rambo or john rambo over the years, one of them appeared in WWF in the mid 1990s as part of the truth commission, they renamed him sniper there, not sure its the same guy but he was billed 6'5 290lb, far right Click Here
if memory serves me correct brody was shorter than Robert Swenson who he feuded with in WCCW, swenson if you recall played Bane in batman and robin film and was billed at 6'4 and 6'5
Ray; a couple of wrestlers have used the name Rambo or john rambo over the years, one of them appeared in WWF in the mid 1990s as part of the truth commission, they renamed him sniper there, not sure its the same guy but he was billed 6'5 290lb, far right Click Here
hs2009 said on 8/Mar/09
Brody's billings were all over the place, I think he was billed as high as 6'7" at one point. Mayeb higher, I'm not sure.
I can see upto 4" between them considering the size of Taker's head. Otherwise it does look more like 3" but it'll be a bit more.
Perhaps Brody 6'4.5" & Taker 6'8"?
Brody's billings were all over the place, I think he was billed as high as 6'7" at one point. Mayeb higher, I'm not sure.
I can see upto 4" between them considering the size of Taker's head. Otherwise it does look more like 3" but it'll be a bit more.
Perhaps Brody 6'4.5" & Taker 6'8"?
Red said on 8/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 8/Mar/09
3-3.5" I agree, but...I don't believe for a second that Brody was only 6'4".
Yes, I saw 6
Shock of Electric says on 8/Mar/09
3-3.5" I agree, but...I don't believe for a second that Brody was only 6'4".
Yes, I saw 6
Shock of Electric said on 8/Mar/09
3-3.5" I agree, but...I don't believe for a second that Brody was only 6'4".
3-3.5" I agree, but...I don't believe for a second that Brody was only 6'4".
Danimal said on 7/Mar/09
SO, if that was Taker's earliest match from 1984, wouldn't that put Taker at only 18-19 years old? Was he even fully grown at that age?
SO, if that was Taker's earliest match from 1984, wouldn't that put Taker at only 18-19 years old? Was he even fully grown at that age?
Red said on 7/Mar/09
4" is pushing it, I say 3-3.5"
4" is pushing it, I say 3-3.5"
Shock of Electric said on 7/Mar/09
Very nice Big Show, I've been waiting a few years to see that match. That's Taker's debut match, so he's only about 19 years old there. Height difference is hard to tell here.
Very nice Big Show, I've been waiting a few years to see that match. That's Taker's debut match, so he's only about 19 years old there. Height difference is hard to tell here.
KingNick said on 7/Mar/09
Big Show, that's an AMAZING find! I'll look it up later, but that may very well have been Mark Calloway's first match. At the very least I know it's his first televised match. In a magazine I have on him, he talks about how Brody's way of breaking him into the business was beating the sh*t out of him.
Big Show, that's an AMAZING find! I'll look it up later, but that may very well have been Mark Calloway's first match. At the very least I know it's his first televised match. In a magazine I have on him, he talks about how Brody's way of breaking him into the business was beating the sh*t out of him.
Ray said on 7/Mar/09
GREAT video Big Show! That's the only time I've seen Taker get beat that bad. Fantastic early match for the deadman. As far as the Yankem/Taker discussion, I've always said and known for myself that Undertaker was taller than Kane. Yankem looked to have advantage in his boots. The thing that made me realize it was in he PWI wrestling almanac from 1998. It said in the trivia section that Kane is really 6'7" but wears big boots/lifts to appear taller. After reading that, I watched Kane and said yep, that looks about right. PWI had some outrageous heights and weights in there thought but that still didn't change the fact Kane had huge boots that my eyes saw. He needed the probably 2" in boots if not a little more to be a little taller than the phenom. Kane's boots today look monstrous as well and it looks to me like he has internal lifts. I look at his ankle and say is his foot to the bottom of that boot? Naaaaaah, no way in h-e double hockey sticks (kept it clean or those youngsters out there that may be reading ;) Undertaker still has flat and normal boots without internal lifts. He's just a genuinely big and tall guy with great athletics and personality - that's why he's the phenom. Times have changed; it seemed in the 80's you just could to be big to become a wrestler; now if you're big it helps but you can certainly be cut and never see the light of day if you don't have it. Undertaker got in immediately because of his size and then made it because he was also very athletic and had personality. Now he is the legendary Undertaker and one of the best ever in he business for sure. SPeaking of PWI, in that almanac it had a wrestler named John Rambo and the name stuck out since I'm a huge Stallone fan, but it had him at 6'5" and in the high 200lbs. area. Does anyone have a John Rambo match? Curious to see that. He was from PA and was probably an indie wrestler from the mid 80's to I'd say early 90's and maybe a little later if my guess is right.
GREAT video Big Show! That's the only time I've seen Taker get beat that bad. Fantastic early match for the deadman. As far as the Yankem/Taker discussion, I've always said and known for myself that Undertaker was taller than Kane. Yankem looked to have advantage in his boots. The thing that made me realize it was in he PWI wrestling almanac from 1998. It said in the trivia section that Kane is really 6'7" but wears big boots/lifts to appear taller. After reading that, I watched Kane and said yep, that looks about right. PWI had some outrageous heights and weights in there thought but that still didn't change the fact Kane had huge boots that my eyes saw. He needed the probably 2" in boots if not a little more to be a little taller than the phenom. Kane's boots today look monstrous as well and it looks to me like he has internal lifts. I look at his ankle and say is his foot to the bottom of that boot? Naaaaaah, no way in h-e double hockey sticks (kept it clean or those youngsters out there that may be reading ;) Undertaker still has flat and normal boots without internal lifts. He's just a genuinely big and tall guy with great athletics and personality - that's why he's the phenom. Times have changed; it seemed in the 80's you just could to be big to become a wrestler; now if you're big it helps but you can certainly be cut and never see the light of day if you don't have it. Undertaker got in immediately because of his size and then made it because he was also very athletic and had personality. Now he is the legendary Undertaker and one of the best ever in he business for sure. SPeaking of PWI, in that almanac it had a wrestler named John Rambo and the name stuck out since I'm a huge Stallone fan, but it had him at 6'5" and in the high 200lbs. area. Does anyone have a John Rambo match? Curious to see that. He was from PA and was probably an indie wrestler from the mid 80's to I'd say early 90's and maybe a little later if my guess is right.
hs2009 said on 7/Mar/09
Excellent find Big Show!
That's certainly a VERY early match in his career. I do believe that Brody was legit 6'4"-6'4.5" & Taker looks to have 3.5"-4" on him although it is hard to tell. Look at 25 secs, it's probably the best staredown to check.
Excellent find Big Show!
That's certainly a VERY early match in his career. I do believe that Brody was legit 6'4"-6'4.5" & Taker looks to have 3.5"-4" on him although it is hard to tell. Look at 25 secs, it's probably the best staredown to check.
Big Show said on 7/Mar/09
Click Here
I recently bought a few old school wrestling dvd's again, which included this match. It's one of Taker's earliest matches, back in WCCW when he used the ring name 'Texas Red'. He's going up against Bruiser Brody. Taker is clearly taller than Brody, but without a formal staredown it's hard to tell how much. According to Stan Hansen (his former tag-team partner) Brody was 6'4.
The match is a complete squash btw.
Click Here
I recently bought a few old school wrestling dvd's again, which included this match. It's one of Taker's earliest matches, back in WCCW when he used the ring name 'Texas Red'. He's going up against Bruiser Brody. Taker is clearly taller than Brody, but without a formal staredown it's hard to tell how much. According to Stan Hansen (his former tag-team partner) Brody was 6'4.
The match is a complete squash btw.
gazz said on 6/Mar/09
there is so much evidence over many months that sway towards glen being taller than taker, especially from that yankem staredown, i feel some people want taker to be taller even though there is strong evidence against it
there is so much evidence over many months that sway towards glen being taller than taker, especially from that yankem staredown, i feel some people want taker to be taller even though there is strong evidence against it
Shock of Electric said on 6/Mar/09
Anonymous, there is no internal lift in Taker's boot and there never has been. You are saying that Taker's heel forms a perfect square point and isn't rounded? The only lift he's getting there is from a physical part of his foot. I would like to see you post where you think his foot stops and the lift starts.
Da Man, Taker has more forehead than Yankem, his head is bigger than Yankem's in general and his eyes are more centered, so it is an illusion of him being shorter there based on eye level. The pic is cut off at the very top of Yankem's head, and more of Taker's is missing. Taker being close to the camera also doesn't change how his height is perceived compared to Yankem's. They come identical height in that match, but you have to factor in Yankem's still got a slight boot advantage, and Taker is standing with his feet slightly wider than Yankem in the staredown, standing up straighter altogether. All are miniscule factors here. If we're going to scrutanize to the 1/4" you can't ignore them. He is not taller than Taker.
Anonymous, there is no internal lift in Taker's boot and there never has been. You are saying that Taker's heel forms a perfect square point and isn't rounded? The only lift he's getting there is from a physical part of his foot. I would like to see you post where you think his foot stops and the lift starts.
Da Man, Taker has more forehead than Yankem, his head is bigger than Yankem's in general and his eyes are more centered, so it is an illusion of him being shorter there based on eye level. The pic is cut off at the very top of Yankem's head, and more of Taker's is missing. Taker being close to the camera also doesn't change how his height is perceived compared to Yankem's. They come identical height in that match, but you have to factor in Yankem's still got a slight boot advantage, and Taker is standing with his feet slightly wider than Yankem in the staredown, standing up straighter altogether. All are miniscule factors here. If we're going to scrutanize to the 1/4" you can't ignore them. He is not taller than Taker.
Danimal said on 6/Mar/09
Anonymous says on 6/Mar/09
what a load of nonsense you can clearly see the internal lift in takers boots with big show, he is wearing 2 inch lifts and was still 5 inches shorter there on video
Clearly SEE the internal lifts???? WHAT???
Anonymous says on 6/Mar/09
what a load of nonsense you can clearly see the internal lift in takers boots with big show, he is wearing 2 inch lifts and was still 5 inches shorter there on video
Clearly SEE the internal lifts???? WHAT???
Da Man said on 6/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 6/Mar/09
"The pics with Yankem are very bad to get an exact height difference because they aren't standing level, and in the close up, the top of Taker's head is cut off, on top of that."
In the Yankem face-off, both of their heads are cut off and Taker is closer to the camera.
Shock of Electric says on 6/Mar/09
"The pics with Yankem are very bad to get an exact height difference because they aren't standing level, and in the close up, the top of Taker's head is cut off, on top of that."
In the Yankem face-off, both of their heads are cut off and Taker is closer to the camera.
Anonymous said on 6/Mar/09
what a load of nonsense you can clearly see the internal lift in takers boots with big show, he is wearing 2 inch lifts and was still 5 inches shorter there on video
what a load of nonsense you can clearly see the internal lift in takers boots with big show, he is wearing 2 inch lifts and was still 5 inches shorter there on video
Shock of Electric said on 6/Mar/09
The pics with Yankem are very bad to get an exact height difference because they aren't standing level, and in the close up, the top of Taker's head is cut off, on top of that.
Taker here Click Here coming out what at a glance appears to be 1" shorter than Kane, it's probably very slightly less but we don't even need to go that far because even 1" will be enough prove it. That cannot be more than 1" based on math if you calculate head height using 1", their heads are slightly larger than they possible could be. At 7/8" they become more reasonable. Now, you have to take into account Kane's boots are huge at this time.
How huge? This huge: Click Here - same boots from the staredown.
These are also the same boots Taker wore during that staredown: Click Here
I have the boot sole outlined because I've seen people post this same pic and cut Taker's heel in half saying they are actually lifts giving him the same amount of boost as Big Show's. Big Show here, has about a .75" boot advantage on Taker. This closes the gap on their height difference to about 3.5"
Wrestling boots are generally layered in 1/4" increments. A typical 80s/early 90s 3 layer/.75" boot is what Taker wore during most of his career in the 90s, and at the time when Kane first came about. To get an arch in the boot, you start with 2 layers in the front, and wedge a third starting towards the middle of the length of the soles, so it doesn't run across the entire length of the boot. For a 1.25" you start with 3 even layers, and wedge in 2 more between the odd layers, one starting 1/3 down the length, the other about 2/3 the way in. Five full layers are approximately equal to 1.25". Kane's boots are approximately 2" or 8 layers, they may even be a solid custom piece of rubber, which are becoming more common today. Those boots would have been made in 1997 and during the mid 90s we started seeing more wrestlers wear thicker boots. The standard is still about 1.25" which is what we see Undertaker, Trips, Orton, and Batista wear today. Mark Henry, Kane, Big Show, BDV all wear at least 1/4" thicker than that.
The bottom line is, there is more of a boot thicness difference than a resulting difference in height. Undertaker is therefore taller than Kane barefoot. This is why when Kane wears his current 1.5" boots and Taker wears 1.25", they come out the same height. When Undertaker wore work boots and Kane wore 1.25" boots in 2000/2001, Undertaker came out taller than Kane. This didn't happen very often, but it did happen.
The pics with Yankem are very bad to get an exact height difference because they aren't standing level, and in the close up, the top of Taker's head is cut off, on top of that.
Taker here Click Here coming out what at a glance appears to be 1" shorter than Kane, it's probably very slightly less but we don't even need to go that far because even 1" will be enough prove it. That cannot be more than 1" based on math if you calculate head height using 1", their heads are slightly larger than they possible could be. At 7/8" they become more reasonable. Now, you have to take into account Kane's boots are huge at this time.
How huge? This huge: Click Here - same boots from the staredown.
These are also the same boots Taker wore during that staredown: Click Here
I have the boot sole outlined because I've seen people post this same pic and cut Taker's heel in half saying they are actually lifts giving him the same amount of boost as Big Show's. Big Show here, has about a .75" boot advantage on Taker. This closes the gap on their height difference to about 3.5"
Wrestling boots are generally layered in 1/4" increments. A typical 80s/early 90s 3 layer/.75" boot is what Taker wore during most of his career in the 90s, and at the time when Kane first came about. To get an arch in the boot, you start with 2 layers in the front, and wedge a third starting towards the middle of the length of the soles, so it doesn't run across the entire length of the boot. For a 1.25" you start with 3 even layers, and wedge in 2 more between the odd layers, one starting 1/3 down the length, the other about 2/3 the way in. Five full layers are approximately equal to 1.25". Kane's boots are approximately 2" or 8 layers, they may even be a solid custom piece of rubber, which are becoming more common today. Those boots would have been made in 1997 and during the mid 90s we started seeing more wrestlers wear thicker boots. The standard is still about 1.25" which is what we see Undertaker, Trips, Orton, and Batista wear today. Mark Henry, Kane, Big Show, BDV all wear at least 1/4" thicker than that.
The bottom line is, there is more of a boot thicness difference than a resulting difference in height. Undertaker is therefore taller than Kane barefoot. This is why when Kane wears his current 1.5" boots and Taker wears 1.25", they come out the same height. When Undertaker wore work boots and Kane wore 1.25" boots in 2000/2001, Undertaker came out taller than Kane. This didn't happen very often, but it did happen.
Alex said on 5/Mar/09
I do believe Kane is slightly taller than UT still. I can put UT at 6'7, I dont have a problem with him at that height but I do believe Khali is 7'1 though and maybe UT put on lifts for that staredown with Khali is my opinion.
I do believe Kane is slightly taller than UT still. I can put UT at 6'7, I dont have a problem with him at that height but I do believe Khali is 7'1 though and maybe UT put on lifts for that staredown with Khali is my opinion.
Da Man said on 5/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says
"First off, Undertaker is very slightly taller than Kane, there's really no questiona about that. I saw someone say he's a half inch taller than Taker which would be buying into the illusion created by the eye level or Kane's lifts"
No big boots here:
Click Here
Taker's head is nowhere near the length of Khali's, not even close, we're talking almost a 2" difference from the tip of the chin to the top of the head.:
Click Here
And unlike Sid, Kane carries quite a bit of height above his eyes, so the eye level comparisons are not nearly as eschewed as they are with Sid.:
Click Here
Click Here
Eye line comparison in undoubtedly comparable footwear, and Taker even has a slight camera advantage here:
Click Here
So in conclusion, yes, there is quite a bit of question about Taker being taller than Kane barefoot. They
Shock of Electric says
"First off, Undertaker is very slightly taller than Kane, there's really no questiona about that. I saw someone say he's a half inch taller than Taker which would be buying into the illusion created by the eye level or Kane's lifts"
No big boots here:
Click Here
Taker's head is nowhere near the length of Khali's, not even close, we're talking almost a 2" difference from the tip of the chin to the top of the head.:
Click Here
And unlike Sid, Kane carries quite a bit of height above his eyes, so the eye level comparisons are not nearly as eschewed as they are with Sid.:
Click Here
Click Here
Eye line comparison in undoubtedly comparable footwear, and Taker even has a slight camera advantage here:
Click Here
So in conclusion, yes, there is quite a bit of question about Taker being taller than Kane barefoot. They
Anonymous said on 5/Mar/09
so why was big show 4 inches taller than akebono in wrestling boots and 4 inches taller than akebono in barefeet if boots are so thick and "lifts", explain people??
so why was big show 4 inches taller than akebono in wrestling boots and 4 inches taller than akebono in barefeet if boots are so thick and "lifts", explain people??
Shock of Electric said on 4/Mar/09
Some wild comments, still people saying he's under 6'7" lol. There are some things that really need to be addressed.
First off, Undertaker is very slightly taller than Kane, there's really no questiona about that. I saw someone say he's a half inch taller than Taker which would be buying into the illusion created by the eye level or Kane's lifts, but with a .25" advantage in boots today, Kane is currently the same height as Taker. When he had an approximately 1.25" boot advantage in the late 90s, he did come out about 1" taller. You can obviously see there are no internal lifts in Taker's boots. His foot is perfectly packed into the shape of the heel.
Something interesting to point out, is that Triple H clearly comes up to Kane's nose when Kane is in lifts that are approximately 1.5", which would be the same difference compared to Taker in even footwear with Triple H (1.25"), but due to posture and camera angles, it doesn't always come out that way. This would suggest there is about a 6" difference in height between Triple H and Undertaker, sometimes it comes out as little 4".
Taker is no shorter than he was in 1990. It's all boots and gimmicked posture.
The only times Taker has ever wore boots thicker than 1.25" were on his debut at Survivor Series 90, when he posed as Kane in the late 90s and every now and then he didn't wear wrestling boots as ABA. Otherwise, from 91 to 94 he wore boots less than 1" thickness, then when he returned in summer of 94 he wore 1.25" briefly, returning to the .75ish until 1997 when he went back to 1.25". When Kane came around he wore .75" until 1999 when left. In 2000 when he returned again, he occasionally wore workboots along the lines of Timberlands, and during a time when Kane wore normal boots, Taker appeared taller than Kane. Since 2004, he's used 1-1.25" boots.
Taker definitely 4.75-5" shorter than Khali, as his forehead is definitely no more than 5". Taker's head also very close in size to Khali's, but his eyes are more centered. Khali definitely doesn't wear lifts perse, but his boots are inherently thick. Big Show's boots are however, lifts.
Some wild comments, still people saying he's under 6'7" lol. There are some things that really need to be addressed.
First off, Undertaker is very slightly taller than Kane, there's really no questiona about that. I saw someone say he's a half inch taller than Taker which would be buying into the illusion created by the eye level or Kane's lifts, but with a .25" advantage in boots today, Kane is currently the same height as Taker. When he had an approximately 1.25" boot advantage in the late 90s, he did come out about 1" taller. You can obviously see there are no internal lifts in Taker's boots. His foot is perfectly packed into the shape of the heel.
Something interesting to point out, is that Triple H clearly comes up to Kane's nose when Kane is in lifts that are approximately 1.5", which would be the same difference compared to Taker in even footwear with Triple H (1.25"), but due to posture and camera angles, it doesn't always come out that way. This would suggest there is about a 6" difference in height between Triple H and Undertaker, sometimes it comes out as little 4".
Taker is no shorter than he was in 1990. It's all boots and gimmicked posture.
The only times Taker has ever wore boots thicker than 1.25" were on his debut at Survivor Series 90, when he posed as Kane in the late 90s and every now and then he didn't wear wrestling boots as ABA. Otherwise, from 91 to 94 he wore boots less than 1" thickness, then when he returned in summer of 94 he wore 1.25" briefly, returning to the .75ish until 1997 when he went back to 1.25". When Kane came around he wore .75" until 1999 when left. In 2000 when he returned again, he occasionally wore workboots along the lines of Timberlands, and during a time when Kane wore normal boots, Taker appeared taller than Kane. Since 2004, he's used 1-1.25" boots.
Taker definitely 4.75-5" shorter than Khali, as his forehead is definitely no more than 5". Taker's head also very close in size to Khali's, but his eyes are more centered. Khali definitely doesn't wear lifts perse, but his boots are inherently thick. Big Show's boots are however, lifts.
willy79 said on 2/Mar/09
Taker right now would have a peak Hogan at about an inch!
Taker right now would have a peak Hogan at about an inch!
willy79 said on 2/Mar/09
miko says on 2/Mar/09
Khali always wears a thick boot. I wouldn't be suprised if he's hiding something in them either especially when he faces Big Show or another tall guy. He's hardly mobile is he? Compare him to Big Show who can still wrestle a good match.
Big Show's boots over alot thicker than Khalis have ever been.
miko says on 2/Mar/09
Khali always wears a thick boot. I wouldn't be suprised if he's hiding something in them either especially when he faces Big Show or another tall guy. He's hardly mobile is he? Compare him to Big Show who can still wrestle a good match.
Big Show's boots over alot thicker than Khalis have ever been.
Paul said on 2/Mar/09
No Khali doesn't wear lifts as such but there is a decent heel there. In the staredown with UT there was a 5.5in or so difference. If Khali is accepted as 7'1 UT indeed would be 6'7.5 or so, but even if Khali's boots gave him an extra 0.25 (if you look at the footage it looks slightly more), UT's height would work out at 6'7.75. He looks about that compared to JBL who is in fact 6'6 maybe 6'6.25...not 6'5 as some people claim on here.
No Khali doesn't wear lifts as such but there is a decent heel there. In the staredown with UT there was a 5.5in or so difference. If Khali is accepted as 7'1 UT indeed would be 6'7.5 or so, but even if Khali's boots gave him an extra 0.25 (if you look at the footage it looks slightly more), UT's height would work out at 6'7.75. He looks about that compared to JBL who is in fact 6'6 maybe 6'6.25...not 6'5 as some people claim on here.
Big Show said on 2/Mar/09
miko says on 2/Mar/09
Khali always wears a thick boot. I wouldn't be suprised if he's hiding something in them either especially when he faces Big Show or another tall guy. He's hardly mobile is he? Compare him to Big Show who can still wrestle a good match.
The reason Khali is hardly mobile is because of his bad knees, not because he's wearing lifts of anything.
miko says on 2/Mar/09
Khali always wears a thick boot. I wouldn't be suprised if he's hiding something in them either especially when he faces Big Show or another tall guy. He's hardly mobile is he? Compare him to Big Show who can still wrestle a good match.
The reason Khali is hardly mobile is because of his bad knees, not because he's wearing lifts of anything.
Red said on 2/Mar/09
Anonymous says on 2/Mar/09
Know also that Khali was wearing thicker boots. Taker is more 6'7.75.
Taker has bigger boots today as he had in the nineties and you don
Anonymous says on 2/Mar/09
Know also that Khali was wearing thicker boots. Taker is more 6'7.75.
Taker has bigger boots today as he had in the nineties and you don
miko said on 2/Mar/09
Khali always wears a thick boot. I wouldn't be suprised if he's hiding something in them either especially when he faces Big Show or another tall guy. He's hardly mobile is he? Compare him to Big Show who can still wrestle a good match.
Khali always wears a thick boot. I wouldn't be suprised if he's hiding something in them either especially when he faces Big Show or another tall guy. He's hardly mobile is he? Compare him to Big Show who can still wrestle a good match.
Anonymous said on 2/Mar/09
Know also that Khali was wearing thicker boots. Taker is more 6'7.75.
Know also that Khali was wearing thicker boots. Taker is more 6'7.75.
hs2009 said on 2/Mar/09
I don't see it being quite that much personally. It looks more like 5" or maybe 5.5" at most.
I know Khali has a huge head, way bigger than a normal person, but I don't see him having quite 6" on The Undertaker.
I don't see it being quite that much personally. It looks more like 5" or maybe 5.5" at most.
I know Khali has a huge head, way bigger than a normal person, but I don't see him having quite 6" on The Undertaker.
Ghost said on 2/Mar/09
Alex says on 27/Feb/09
Khali may have 6 inches on UT.
C'mon, we all know that's just absurd. Taker came up to khali's eyebrows.
Taker is not 6'6 or 6'6,5 , I don't know why some people here insist on it make strange claims like Khali having Taker by 6 inches.
In recent photos he was well-over a head taller than Chavo Guerrero and had aatleast 2 inches on JBL.
I really haven't seen any evidence for his suggested huge heightloss. 6'7,5 seems fine for him today.
He can look shorter by slouching which he almost always does, but when he stands straight, it's apparent he is still over 6'7.
Alex says on 27/Feb/09
Khali may have 6 inches on UT.
C'mon, we all know that's just absurd. Taker came up to khali's eyebrows.
Taker is not 6'6 or 6'6,5 , I don't know why some people here insist on it make strange claims like Khali having Taker by 6 inches.
In recent photos he was well-over a head taller than Chavo Guerrero and had aatleast 2 inches on JBL.
I really haven't seen any evidence for his suggested huge heightloss. 6'7,5 seems fine for him today.
He can look shorter by slouching which he almost always does, but when he stands straight, it's apparent he is still over 6'7.
nick said on 1/Mar/09
i dont know alex.. With all the encounters with the undertaker and khali it would be the smallest 6 inches iv ever seen. im going to post the video again. Alex give me your input.
Pause at exactly 1 minute. Its so weird that he is actually that close to the great khali's height. Remember this is khali's debut so they wouldnt downsize his height or upgrade takers. It really is a clean 5 inches no more no less. Then pause at 2:12. Alsthough they are both tall guys this is very similiar to how a 5'9 5'10 guy looks like next to me im close to 6'3 (6'2.5)When i put a line at the top of takers head to khali there are no facial features above the line at all. If khali is for sure 7'1 legit this is the best evidence for the undertaker to still be 6'8, although he does look shorter half the time. Also if you pause at 1:03 it isnt a good source for exact height difference but it is weird that khali actually doesnt tower taker at all.
The best comparison in the video is at 2:12 where it cuts to an almost side shot for a split second that isnt seen often in any videos. Taker really matches up to khali very well and it is odd. If you compare khali to a guy like cena in these side shots or even triple h he absolutly dwarfs them where he is actually looking near a foot over them.
If you pause at 2:12 and really analize the difference in tha shot and say oh the undertaker is 6'6 and imagine him being 2 inches taller to be 6'8 he would be 3 inches away from khali
Click Here
The second image is the real one and the first one is altered.
Now if you say taker is 6'6 6'6.5 asuming that is his actual height i increased his height to make him around 6'7.5 6'8 in the first image. Now as you can see he is now approximatly 3 inches away from khali's height which would make khali maximum 6'11. This proves that taker is not 6'6 6'6.5 but more 6'7.5.
Now if you assume taker is say 6'7.5 6'8 on the real picture on the right then his height increase on the left would make him around 6'9.5 or around kevin nash's height. Now that looks more accurate next to a person who is 7'1.
Undertaker is always up to khali's brow. If you pause at 9:11 the height difference looks to me even shy of 5 inches but i think that has to do with khali's wider stance . The top of the video border looks close to 6 inches on that screen shot from the top of takers head. Now imagine if you said taker was 5'6 how tall would you say khali is? 6'1? no way. maybe 5'11. This looks exactly like how a 5'8 guy would look to a 6'1 guy with a aider stance thats it plain and simple
i dont know alex.. With all the encounters with the undertaker and khali it would be the smallest 6 inches iv ever seen. im going to post the video again. Alex give me your input.
Pause at exactly 1 minute. Its so weird that he is actually that close to the great khali's height. Remember this is khali's debut so they wouldnt downsize his height or upgrade takers. It really is a clean 5 inches no more no less. Then pause at 2:12. Alsthough they are both tall guys this is very similiar to how a 5'9 5'10 guy looks like next to me im close to 6'3 (6'2.5)When i put a line at the top of takers head to khali there are no facial features above the line at all. If khali is for sure 7'1 legit this is the best evidence for the undertaker to still be 6'8, although he does look shorter half the time. Also if you pause at 1:03 it isnt a good source for exact height difference but it is weird that khali actually doesnt tower taker at all.
The best comparison in the video is at 2:12 where it cuts to an almost side shot for a split second that isnt seen often in any videos. Taker really matches up to khali very well and it is odd. If you compare khali to a guy like cena in these side shots or even triple h he absolutly dwarfs them where he is actually looking near a foot over them.
If you pause at 2:12 and really analize the difference in tha shot and say oh the undertaker is 6'6 and imagine him being 2 inches taller to be 6'8 he would be 3 inches away from khali
Click Here
The second image is the real one and the first one is altered.
Now if you say taker is 6'6 6'6.5 asuming that is his actual height i increased his height to make him around 6'7.5 6'8 in the first image. Now as you can see he is now approximatly 3 inches away from khali's height which would make khali maximum 6'11. This proves that taker is not 6'6 6'6.5 but more 6'7.5.
Now if you assume taker is say 6'7.5 6'8 on the real picture on the right then his height increase on the left would make him around 6'9.5 or around kevin nash's height. Now that looks more accurate next to a person who is 7'1.
Undertaker is always up to khali's brow. If you pause at 9:11 the height difference looks to me even shy of 5 inches but i think that has to do with khali's wider stance . The top of the video border looks close to 6 inches on that screen shot from the top of takers head. Now imagine if you said taker was 5'6 how tall would you say khali is? 6'1? no way. maybe 5'11. This looks exactly like how a 5'8 guy would look to a 6'1 guy with a aider stance thats it plain and simple
Alex said on 27/Feb/09
Khali may have 6 inches on UT.
Khali may have 6 inches on UT.
Danimal said on 27/Feb/09
Clay says on 26/Feb/09
sid says on 26/Feb/09
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
People get bored with the site sometimes and try to ''uncover'' new theories, such as Undertaker possibly being only 6'6 today. Yet, when the guy stands straight, he is easily 6'7-6'7.5 still at least.
I'm just bored with people like YOU who tell me my opinions are absurd or ridiculous.
Clay says on 26/Feb/09
sid says on 26/Feb/09
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
People get bored with the site sometimes and try to ''uncover'' new theories, such as Undertaker possibly being only 6'6 today. Yet, when the guy stands straight, he is easily 6'7-6'7.5 still at least.
I'm just bored with people like YOU who tell me my opinions are absurd or ridiculous.
Ghost said on 27/Feb/09
Clay says on 26/Feb/09
Only in his dreams is Taker within 4 inches of Khali.
I'd say Khali is just under 7'1 and Taker about 6'7,5 these days.
The difference between them is about 5 inches.
Clay says on 26/Feb/09
Only in his dreams is Taker within 4 inches of Khali.
I'd say Khali is just under 7'1 and Taker about 6'7,5 these days.
The difference between them is about 5 inches.
Clay said on 26/Feb/09
sid says on 26/Feb/09
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
People get bored with the site sometimes and try to ''uncover'' new theories, such as Undertaker possibly being only 6'6 today. Yet, when the guy stands straight, he is easily 6'7-6'7.5 still at least.
sid says on 26/Feb/09
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
People get bored with the site sometimes and try to ''uncover'' new theories, such as Undertaker possibly being only 6'6 today. Yet, when the guy stands straight, he is easily 6'7-6'7.5 still at least.
Clay said on 26/Feb/09
Only in his dreams is Taker within 4 inches of Khali.
Only in his dreams is Taker within 4 inches of Khali.
tuga said on 26/Feb/09
sid says on 26/Feb/09
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
I agree, in ring gear kane has half an inch, here
sid says on 26/Feb/09
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
I agree, in ring gear kane has half an inch, here
sid said on 26/Feb/09
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
who ever thinks kane and taker is 6'6 is absurbed.... get with the program, kane may have 0'5 inches on taker
mike said on 26/Feb/09
taker has a solid 4 inches on hogan,so with that taker is looking about 6'8".taker also looks to be about 4-5 inches shorter than The Great Khali who is around 7'1".
taker has a solid 4 inches on hogan,so with that taker is looking about 6'8".taker also looks to be about 4-5 inches shorter than The Great Khali who is around 7'1".
tuga said on 25/Feb/09
Annoyed says on 24/Feb/09
Anno Tuga, I was being sarcastic, it is ridiculous. 6'6" LOL !!!!!!!! He is at LEAST 6'7" nowadays.
I know Annoyed, just agreeing with you and others.
Annoyed says on 24/Feb/09
Anno Tuga, I was being sarcastic, it is ridiculous. 6'6" LOL !!!!!!!! He is at LEAST 6'7" nowadays.
I know Annoyed, just agreeing with you and others.
ancient Aztec Guy said on 24/Feb/09
I will give taker a solid 6'8".
I will give taker a solid 6'8".
Da Man said on 24/Feb/09
tuga says
"Da Man, Taker has about 3 inches on Jbl"
I see more 2", 2.5" max.
tuga says
"Da Man, Taker has about 3 inches on Jbl"
I see more 2", 2.5" max.
Annoyed said on 24/Feb/09
tuga says on 23/Feb/09
Annoyed says on 23/Feb/09
there we go then, I guess it is now somehow accepted that Taker is 6'6" ? OUTRAGEOUS.
Anno Tuga, I was being sarcastic, it is ridiculous. 6'6" LOL !!!!!!!! He is at LEAST 6'7" nowadays.
tuga says on 23/Feb/09
Annoyed says on 23/Feb/09
there we go then, I guess it is now somehow accepted that Taker is 6'6" ? OUTRAGEOUS.
Anno Tuga, I was being sarcastic, it is ridiculous. 6'6" LOL !!!!!!!! He is at LEAST 6'7" nowadays.
tuga said on 24/Feb/09
Da Man and Nick are right, taker may give sometimes a shorter impression because of horrible posture but we should judge his height standing tall...
Da Man, Taker has about 3 inches on Jbl, Ola, Taker had no way 4 inches on hogan in 1991, he didn
Da Man and Nick are right, taker may give sometimes a shorter impression because of horrible posture but we should judge his height standing tall...
Da Man, Taker has about 3 inches on Jbl, Ola, Taker had no way 4 inches on hogan in 1991, he didn
Big Show said on 24/Feb/09
Ola says on 23/Feb/09
Yep! taker had hogan by 2-3 inches in 1991 and atleast 4 in 2002-2003, but then take in mind his very thin shoes he had back in early 90's. barefooted taker probarly had also 4 inches on hogan even back in 1991.
That's assuming Hogan had a 1-2 inch footwear advantage over Taker, which just isn't the case. His boots were maybe slightly bigger than the ones he use to wear in the 80's, but I doubt they gave him more than a 0.75-1" height boost. Taker's boots probably gave him a 0.5" height boost. So the footwear difference is insignificant.
Click Here
If Hogan was wearing 1.5-2" footwear, what's Sgt. Slaughter wearing 2.5-3"?
Click Here
Ola says on 23/Feb/09
Yep! taker had hogan by 2-3 inches in 1991 and atleast 4 in 2002-2003, but then take in mind his very thin shoes he had back in early 90's. barefooted taker probarly had also 4 inches on hogan even back in 1991.
That's assuming Hogan had a 1-2 inch footwear advantage over Taker, which just isn't the case. His boots were maybe slightly bigger than the ones he use to wear in the 80's, but I doubt they gave him more than a 0.75-1" height boost. Taker's boots probably gave him a 0.5" height boost. So the footwear difference is insignificant.
Click Here
If Hogan was wearing 1.5-2" footwear, what's Sgt. Slaughter wearing 2.5-3"?
Click Here
Da Man said on 23/Feb/09
Taker isn't 6'6", people say the same thing in cycles then another piece of evidence pops up where he bothers to stand tall, then the 6'6" theories are silenced by and large for the next several months.
If Taker (with good posture) is 6'6", JBL is 6'4", Orton 6'2"-6'3", the Rock 6'1", Big Show 6'10", etc.
I'm still amazed by how much posture confuses some people here.
The guy is no less than 6'7" even today, and his height loss versus peak is hardly significant, definitely no 1.5" as some argue.
Taker isn't 6'6", people say the same thing in cycles then another piece of evidence pops up where he bothers to stand tall, then the 6'6" theories are silenced by and large for the next several months.
If Taker (with good posture) is 6'6", JBL is 6'4", Orton 6'2"-6'3", the Rock 6'1", Big Show 6'10", etc.
I'm still amazed by how much posture confuses some people here.
The guy is no less than 6'7" even today, and his height loss versus peak is hardly significant, definitely no 1.5" as some argue.
tuga said on 23/Feb/09
Annoyed says on 23/Feb/09
there we go then, I guess it is now somehow accepted that Taker is 6'6" ? OUTRAGEOUS.
NO WAY taker is 6'6.
For example look at the evidence with Jbl, he is 3 inches taller, even in the video vegas posted taker has horrible posture and Jbl has footware advantage and there
Annoyed says on 23/Feb/09
there we go then, I guess it is now somehow accepted that Taker is 6'6" ? OUTRAGEOUS.
NO WAY taker is 6'6.
For example look at the evidence with Jbl, he is 3 inches taller, even in the video vegas posted taker has horrible posture and Jbl has footware advantage and there
Danimal said on 23/Feb/09
Hogan was obviously closer to Taker's height in the 1991-1992 than he was in 2002-2003.
Hogan was obviously closer to Taker's height in the 1991-1992 than he was in 2002-2003.
Paul said on 23/Feb/09
Quite a few claims of 6'6 and 6'6.5 for Undertaker on here. Curiously would the same guys claim the same height for Big Daddy V ? Are they really the same height ?
Quite a few claims of 6'6 and 6'6.5 for Undertaker on here. Curiously would the same guys claim the same height for Big Daddy V ? Are they really the same height ?
Clay said on 23/Feb/09
Austin registers next to Shaq just like 6'1 Steve Nash does Al, if not better.
Austin registers next to Shaq just like 6'1 Steve Nash does Al, if not better.
Alex said on 23/Feb/09
6 inches taller is a lot to be billed taller as. But at 6'6 you can get away with 7'0 easier than 5'6 being billed at 6'0.
6 inches taller is a lot to be billed taller as. But at 6'6 you can get away with 7'0 easier than 5'6 being billed at 6'0.
Clay said on 23/Feb/09
You did say you believed Vince to once be 6'2 Alex.
You did say you believed Vince to once be 6'2 Alex.
Annoyed said on 23/Feb/09
there we go then, I guess it is now somehow accepted that Taker is 6'6" ? OUTRAGEOUS.
there we go then, I guess it is now somehow accepted that Taker is 6'6" ? OUTRAGEOUS.
Ray said on 23/Feb/09
Yeah, sure if Taker is 6'6" then Hogan is barely 6'2" if that since Taker has 4 inches on him, Kane is also about 6'6", Show and Khali are for sure under 7' - especially Show since he only looks to have 4" on Taker and maybe a hair less. Khali has about 5"
Yeah, sure if Taker is 6'6" then Hogan is barely 6'2" if that since Taker has 4 inches on him, Kane is also about 6'6", Show and Khali are for sure under 7' - especially Show since he only looks to have 4" on Taker and maybe a hair less. Khali has about 5"
1PunchBob said on 23/Feb/09
Jim Ross and JBL have both said before taker is a near 7 footer....really is bout 6`6 barefoot!! i am a short-ass 5`6...so shall i go round telling people i am a near 6 footer LOL???
Jim Ross and JBL have both said before taker is a near 7 footer....really is bout 6`6 barefoot!! i am a short-ass 5`6...so shall i go round telling people i am a near 6 footer LOL???
JT said on 22/Feb/09
I posted a variant of this on Hogan's page a while ago. Click Here
From 2003 Click Here Taker has a footwear advantage here. Hogan
I posted a variant of this on Hogan's page a while ago. Click Here
From 2003 Click Here Taker has a footwear advantage here. Hogan
Alex said on 22/Feb/09
Austin may have been 6'0.5-6'1 at his peak. Today he's 6'0 to 6'0 1/2 max.
Austin may have been 6'0.5-6'1 at his peak. Today he's 6'0 to 6'0 1/2 max.
Clay said on 22/Feb/09
Austin is 6'0.5-6'1.
Austin is 6'0.5-6'1.
mike said on 21/Feb/09
don't care what anyone says. taker is 6 ft 6 barefeet.
don't care what anyone says. taker is 6 ft 6 barefeet.
nick said on 21/Feb/09
hey red, heres a better look for the unimaginative haha. i did this almost a year ago now. Click Here Its safe to say how ever tall hogan is taker is 4 inches on him
hey red, heres a better look for the unimaginative haha. i did this almost a year ago now. Click Here Its safe to say how ever tall hogan is taker is 4 inches on him
Vegas said on 21/Feb/09
there is no staredown in the taker/austin video from 1996, how are we to compare?? there is a good staredown though in nicks video from 1997
there is no staredown in the taker/austin video from 1996, how are we to compare?? there is a good staredown though in nicks video from 1997
Alex said on 21/Feb/09
Danimal, nice video. Shows how UT has gotten shorter. He looks 6'8 there in that video.
I wouldn't say 6'6 is a joke for UT. I dont think hes that low but can look it sometimes. He's closer to 6'6 than 6'8 though today
Danimal, nice video. Shows how UT has gotten shorter. He looks 6'8 there in that video.
I wouldn't say 6'6 is a joke for UT. I dont think hes that low but can look it sometimes. He's closer to 6'6 than 6'8 though today
Paul said on 21/Feb/09
nick, yes I have to challenge now and again and I'm staying around a while so I won't take a hike just yet.
nick, yes I have to challenge now and again and I'm staying around a while so I won't take a hike just yet.
Red said on 21/Feb/09
Click Here
Akebono is legit 204cm and Albert is shorter in boots, Taker is also shorter than Akebono so Taker wasn
Click Here
Akebono is legit 204cm and Albert is shorter in boots, Taker is also shorter than Akebono so Taker wasn
Danimal said on 20/Feb/09
1996 version of Undertaker TOWERED 6'0" Steve Austin WAY more than he did in that recent video of them standing side by side in 2002? Click Here
1996 version of Undertaker TOWERED 6'0" Steve Austin WAY more than he did in that recent video of them standing side by side in 2002? Click Here
Annoyed said on 20/Feb/09
Danimal, look at Takers footwear compared to Undertakers. I think that explains that. I think Albert is 6'6" flat and 6'7" in those boots, maybe 6'7.5" whereas Taker is 6'7.5" flat and id say those look like 0.5" flats. The point of that match was to have Taker stand up against a physical rival, Albert with boots can be that man easy, not even a need for lifts. You have your opinion and I respectfully disagree. 6'6.5" too low in my opinion, he was defo a large tall man in his youth and I think eh has lost 1" tops but not much more.
Danimal, look at Takers footwear compared to Undertakers. I think that explains that. I think Albert is 6'6" flat and 6'7" in those boots, maybe 6'7.5" whereas Taker is 6'7.5" flat and id say those look like 0.5" flats. The point of that match was to have Taker stand up against a physical rival, Albert with boots can be that man easy, not even a need for lifts. You have your opinion and I respectfully disagree. 6'6.5" too low in my opinion, he was defo a large tall man in his youth and I think eh has lost 1" tops but not much more.
Paul said on 20/Feb/09
Hi KingNick,
yeah sometimes
Hi KingNick,
yeah sometimes
Clay said on 20/Feb/09
6'6 is a joke for Undertaker.
6'6 is a joke for Undertaker.
Ray said on 20/Feb/09
Danimal says on 19/Feb/09
Annoyed says on 19/Feb/09
6'8" peak, 6'7.5" now. 6'6" is other-worldly and even 6'6.5" is ridiculous. In fact, 6'7" is really really pushing it.
He was barely taller than MAX 6'6" A-Train.
A-Trains boots were huge.
Danimal says on 19/Feb/09
Annoyed says on 19/Feb/09
6'8" peak, 6'7.5" now. 6'6" is other-worldly and even 6'6.5" is ridiculous. In fact, 6'7" is really really pushing it.
He was barely taller than MAX 6'6" A-Train.
A-Trains boots were huge.
nick said on 20/Feb/09
ah paul. I have seen you here so long, i guess you have your veteran strikes to challenge us a little and see if were all on our toes haha. Da Man agreeing with you is like agreeing with fact on that statment you said. I have no problem admitting taker looks 6'5 as much as he looks 6'8, however where the weight scare is heaviest is with taller guys so him being within 5 inches of khali 4 at times with the big show tall as kane 2 inches with nash inch on sid, inch+ on vicera, not even two inches with jones, you have to say he has the stature of a 6'8 man, its somthing you just cant not take into account.
Scroll down if you didnt see the footage of taker having close to 7 inches on austin
ah paul. I have seen you here so long, i guess you have your veteran strikes to challenge us a little and see if were all on our toes haha. Da Man agreeing with you is like agreeing with fact on that statment you said. I have no problem admitting taker looks 6'5 as much as he looks 6'8, however where the weight scare is heaviest is with taller guys so him being within 5 inches of khali 4 at times with the big show tall as kane 2 inches with nash inch on sid, inch+ on vicera, not even two inches with jones, you have to say he has the stature of a 6'8 man, its somthing you just cant not take into account.
Scroll down if you didnt see the footage of taker having close to 7 inches on austin
KingNick said on 20/Feb/09
Paul says on 20/Feb/09
Vegas you know I like to have a laugh now and again.
Are you anonymous ?? LOL
Paul says on 20/Feb/09
Vegas you know I like to have a laugh now and again.
Are you anonymous ?? LOL
Paul said on 20/Feb/09
Vegas you know I like to have a laugh now and again.
Vegas you know I like to have a laugh now and again.
Anonymous said on 20/Feb/09
I have seen footage of Taker looking 5 inches taller than Austin. I will try and find it to post on here. Austin's head reached Takers eye level. He is 6'6 you should know it. Kane is 6'7. He is taller and heavier.
I have seen footage of Taker looking 5 inches taller than Austin. I will try and find it to post on here. Austin's head reached Takers eye level. He is 6'6 you should know it. Kane is 6'7. He is taller and heavier.
Da Man said on 19/Feb/09
Danimal says on 16/Feb/09
"There is no way Taker had almost 7-8" on Stone Cold and almost 10" on Chris Angle. Taker is about 6'6.5" today imo and makes up for it with thick boots."
Taker is not anything under 6'7" when he bothers to stand straight and raise his head. He does have the uncanny ability to look 6'5" at times though.
Danimal says on 16/Feb/09
"There is no way Taker had almost 7-8" on Stone Cold and almost 10" on Chris Angle. Taker is about 6'6.5" today imo and makes up for it with thick boots."
Taker is not anything under 6'7" when he bothers to stand straight and raise his head. He does have the uncanny ability to look 6'5" at times though.
Marotte said on 19/Feb/09
I'd say 6'8" for taker and 6'5.5".
I'd say 6'8" for taker and 6'5.5".
nick said on 19/Feb/09
jbl has been looking 6'5 and over his whole career. Anonymouse take a hike, i dont want people coming on here talking about how tall jbl is for the next couple of days, the debate is pointless.
jbl has been looking 6'5 and over his whole career. Anonymouse take a hike, i dont want people coming on here talking about how tall jbl is for the next couple of days, the debate is pointless.
Alex2 said on 19/Feb/09
I think JBL could be 6'5.5"
I think JBL could be 6'5.5"
Danimal said on 19/Feb/09
Annoyed says on 19/Feb/09
6'8" peak, 6'7.5" now. 6'6" is other-worldly and even 6'6.5" is ridiculous. In fact, 6'7" is really really pushing it.
He was barely taller than MAX 6'6" A-Train.
Annoyed says on 19/Feb/09
6'8" peak, 6'7.5" now. 6'6" is other-worldly and even 6'6.5" is ridiculous. In fact, 6'7" is really really pushing it.
He was barely taller than MAX 6'6" A-Train.
Vegas said on 19/Feb/09
Anonymous says on 19/Feb/09
Vegas, 6'5 is his height for JBL in big boots and a bouffant hair do. Taker about that barefeet or 6'6 when his hair resembles a brush.
so why was he listed 6ft 5 in pro-football?? why is he as tall as a measured 6ft 5 army general who is wearing army boots, why was he as tall as barry windham whom 5'8 mamun has a photo with Click Here you make it sound like jlb would be 6'1-6'2 barefoot and bald
jbl 6'5 in big boots/bouffant hair do is seriously bad news for batista Click Here
Anonymous says on 19/Feb/09
Vegas, 6'5 is his height for JBL in big boots and a bouffant hair do. Taker about that barefeet or 6'6 when his hair resembles a brush.
so why was he listed 6ft 5 in pro-football?? why is he as tall as a measured 6ft 5 army general who is wearing army boots, why was he as tall as barry windham whom 5'8 mamun has a photo with Click Here you make it sound like jlb would be 6'1-6'2 barefoot and bald
jbl 6'5 in big boots/bouffant hair do is seriously bad news for batista Click Here
Anonymous said on 19/Feb/09
Vegas, 6'5 is his height for JBL in big boots and a bouffant hair do. Taker about that barefeet or 6'6 when his hair resembles a brush.
Vegas, 6'5 is his height for JBL in big boots and a bouffant hair do. Taker about that barefeet or 6'6 when his hair resembles a brush.
Anonymous said on 19/Feb/09
See the video Vegas posted wiv UT and JBL... if JBL is 6'4 Taker looks just over 6'5. Go see. So yea 6'6.5 is ridiculos.
See the video Vegas posted wiv UT and JBL... if JBL is 6'4 Taker looks just over 6'5. Go see. So yea 6'6.5 is ridiculos.
Ghost said on 19/Feb/09
From the Big Show board:
"tuga says on 18/Feb/09
Click Here
Taker and Jbl, side by side, no camera tilt as we can see from the door frame and painting in the wall."
I would love people who say Taker is 6'6 or 6'6,5 today to comment on this photo with JBL who was just proven to be atleast 6'5 standing next to a 6'5 army guy.
From the Big Show board:
"tuga says on 18/Feb/09
Click Here
Taker and Jbl, side by side, no camera tilt as we can see from the door frame and painting in the wall."
I would love people who say Taker is 6'6 or 6'6,5 today to comment on this photo with JBL who was just proven to be atleast 6'5 standing next to a 6'5 army guy.
Annoyed said on 19/Feb/09
6'8" peak, 6'7.5" now. 6'6" is other-worldly and even 6'6.5" is ridiculous. In fact, 6'7" is really really pushing it.
6'8" peak, 6'7.5" now. 6'6" is other-worldly and even 6'6.5" is ridiculous. In fact, 6'7" is really really pushing it.
Clay said on 18/Feb/09
6'6 is insanity for Undertaker even today.
6'6 is insanity for Undertaker even today.
Alex2 said on 18/Feb/09
Taker at 6'6.5" is laughable, a weak 6'8" today i say and a strong 6'8" peak
Taker at 6'6.5" is laughable, a weak 6'8" today i say and a strong 6'8" peak
KingNick said on 18/Feb/09
Great pics and videos all around from everyone! My theory is that whatever JBL's height is UT has about 2" on him. In the video Vegas posted, JBL has cowboy boots on but UT looks to have some hefty footwear too. I think that's only to make up the difference tho. The pic tuga posted has UT looking almost 3" taller and it's a dead on shot.
I'm dead set on JBL being somewhere from 6'5" - 6'6" Vegas also posted a bunch of great pics on the Big Show page of wrestlers with a 6'5" general Click Here
Great pics and videos all around from everyone! My theory is that whatever JBL's height is UT has about 2" on him. In the video Vegas posted, JBL has cowboy boots on but UT looks to have some hefty footwear too. I think that's only to make up the difference tho. The pic tuga posted has UT looking almost 3" taller and it's a dead on shot.
I'm dead set on JBL being somewhere from 6'5" - 6'6" Vegas also posted a bunch of great pics on the Big Show page of wrestlers with a 6'5" general Click Here
said on 18/Feb/09
Vegas what do you reckoin ? Do you thinnk JBL could indeed be 6'4 ?
Vegas what do you reckoin ? Do you thinnk JBL could indeed be 6'4 ?
Ray said on 18/Feb/09
That's a good picture Tuga and JBL is probably in cowboy boots giving him some extra height advantage. I'd say JBL is definitely 6'5"
That's a good picture Tuga and JBL is probably in cowboy boots giving him some extra height advantage. I'd say JBL is definitely 6'5"
Anonymous said on 18/Feb/09
He is indeed Jake. I concurr with that. Taker is 6'11 out of bed. Kane 6'9 with cowboy boots. Stone Cold 6'2 with lifts. Rock 6'3, JBL I beleve 6'4.
He is indeed Jake. I concurr with that. Taker is 6'11 out of bed. Kane 6'9 with cowboy boots. Stone Cold 6'2 with lifts. Rock 6'3, JBL I beleve 6'4.
tuga said on 18/Feb/09
nick says on 16/Feb/09
Danimal if taker is 6'6.5 khali is 6'11, 7 feet maximum.More likely 6'11. There is no way around it. I know its very weird how he seems shorter next to 6'2 6'3 guys but thats what makes his height for debate
Nick, he seens shorter because of very poor posture, Ive posted a pic of taker and minimum 6'5 Jbl at big show
nick says on 16/Feb/09
Danimal if taker is 6'6.5 khali is 6'11, 7 feet maximum.More likely 6'11. There is no way around it. I know its very weird how he seems shorter next to 6'2 6'3 guys but thats what makes his height for debate
Nick, he seens shorter because of very poor posture, Ive posted a pic of taker and minimum 6'5 Jbl at big show
Ghost said on 18/Feb/09
Jake says on 17/Feb/09
Why is it everyone wants to understate the real height of these wrestlers? Batista is 6'5" get over it!
Batista was max 2 inches or so taller than 6'1 billed Mark Henry.
Jake says on 17/Feb/09
Why is it everyone wants to understate the real height of these wrestlers? Batista is 6'5" get over it!
Batista was max 2 inches or so taller than 6'1 billed Mark Henry.
Jake said on 17/Feb/09
Why is it everyone wants to understate the real height of these wrestlers? Batista is 6'5" get over it!
Why is it everyone wants to understate the real height of these wrestlers? Batista is 6'5" get over it!
nick said on 17/Feb/09
Click Here
btw, it seems everyone doesnt look their"given height", you have the supposive "6'2.75" batista looking taller than 6'4 orton (arguably even taller) the whole segment. Now how tall do you think batista is?. I honestly think batista is 6'3.5 way before i even saw this video.
Click Here
btw, it seems everyone doesnt look their"given height", you have the supposive "6'2.75" batista looking taller than 6'4 orton (arguably even taller) the whole segment. Now how tall do you think batista is?. I honestly think batista is 6'3.5 way before i even saw this video.
nick said on 17/Feb/09
Click Here pause at 5:08 for best comparison.
sorry Danimal, i have two things that prove your theory wrong on taker not looking 6 to 7 inches taller than austin, and 10 inches on kurt angle. now i know ure basing it off that one video backstage, however, this is a in ring shot and its just factual that he is about 6.5 inches maybe 7 inches taller than austin. Believe me it impresses me too i dont know how he does it, but its great. Also if you look at the rock backstage vid i posed on the kane page he stands straight and seems around 5 inches taller than the rock.
o, Click Here
heres another reason why triple h can be 6'3
Click Here and another
Click Here and another
Click Here and another
Click Here takers looks to be 5 on h here
Click Here looks 8 to 9 on shawn here. (compare to jbl seems 2+ inches taller
Click Here little random camera angle favors taker but u see he has an inch on sid(this video has yet to be posted on celebheights) 1:09
Click Here pause at 5:08 for best comparison.
sorry Danimal, i have two things that prove your theory wrong on taker not looking 6 to 7 inches taller than austin, and 10 inches on kurt angle. now i know ure basing it off that one video backstage, however, this is a in ring shot and its just factual that he is about 6.5 inches maybe 7 inches taller than austin. Believe me it impresses me too i dont know how he does it, but its great. Also if you look at the rock backstage vid i posed on the kane page he stands straight and seems around 5 inches taller than the rock.
o, Click Here
heres another reason why triple h can be 6'3
Click Here and another
Click Here and another
Click Here and another
Click Here takers looks to be 5 on h here
Click Here looks 8 to 9 on shawn here. (compare to jbl seems 2+ inches taller
Click Here little random camera angle favors taker but u see he has an inch on sid(this video has yet to be posted on celebheights) 1:09
Clay said on 16/Feb/09
Alex says on 15/Feb/09
Kane is still at least 1/2 inch taller than UT today. Though UT was more taller against Khali than Kane was.
I dont know about this - this is Kane we're talking about who's to say he wasnt plopped up on lifts next to the 7'1-7'1.25 Khali either. I can go as low as 6'7.5 for Calloway today, no lower.
Alex says on 15/Feb/09
Kane is still at least 1/2 inch taller than UT today. Though UT was more taller against Khali than Kane was.
I dont know about this - this is Kane we're talking about who's to say he wasnt plopped up on lifts next to the 7'1-7'1.25 Khali either. I can go as low as 6'7.5 for Calloway today, no lower.
nick said on 16/Feb/09
Danimal if taker is 6'6.5 khali is 6'11, 7 feet maximum.More likely 6'11. There is no way around it. I know its very weird how he seems shorter next to 6'2 6'3 guys but thats what makes his height for debate
Danimal if taker is 6'6.5 khali is 6'11, 7 feet maximum.More likely 6'11. There is no way around it. I know its very weird how he seems shorter next to 6'2 6'3 guys but thats what makes his height for debate
Alex said on 16/Feb/09
My current estimate on UT and Kane are
UT 6'7
Kane 6'7.5
Tends to change here and there but UT is in the 6'6.5-6'7 range as Kane is pushing 6'8 or at 6'8 flat.
My current estimate on UT and Kane are
UT 6'7
Kane 6'7.5
Tends to change here and there but UT is in the 6'6.5-6'7 range as Kane is pushing 6'8 or at 6'8 flat.
Paul said on 16/Feb/09
Yeah I'm back. Taker's boots don't look that thick to me.. I'll guess we'll have to disagree.
Yeah I'm back. Taker's boots don't look that thick to me.. I'll guess we'll have to disagree.
Danimal said on 16/Feb/09
Paul says on 16/Feb/09
I think they are both about 6'7.75 actually. Seems sensible if Khali is 7'1 and Taker was about 5'5 less... with Khali if anything having a slight footwear advantage with that height difference.
There is no way Taker had almost 7-8" on Stone Cold and almost 10" on Chris Angle. Taker is about 6'6.5" today imo and makes up for it with thick boots.
Paul says on 16/Feb/09
I think they are both about 6'7.75 actually. Seems sensible if Khali is 7'1 and Taker was about 5'5 less... with Khali if anything having a slight footwear advantage with that height difference.
There is no way Taker had almost 7-8" on Stone Cold and almost 10" on Chris Angle. Taker is about 6'6.5" today imo and makes up for it with thick boots.
Paul said on 16/Feb/09
I think they are both about 6'7.75 actually. Seems sensible if Khali is 7'1 and Taker was about 5'5 less... with Khali if anything having a slight footwear advantage with that height difference.
I think they are both about 6'7.75 actually. Seems sensible if Khali is 7'1 and Taker was about 5'5 less... with Khali if anything having a slight footwear advantage with that height difference.
Ghost said on 16/Feb/09
Alex says on 15/Feb/09
Kane is still at least 1/2 inch taller than UT today. Though UT was more taller against Khali than Kane was.
Why do you think Kane is still 1/2 or more taller than Taker?
Alex says on 15/Feb/09
Kane is still at least 1/2 inch taller than UT today. Though UT was more taller against Khali than Kane was.
Why do you think Kane is still 1/2 or more taller than Taker?
Alex said on 15/Feb/09
Kane is still at least 1/2 inch taller than UT today. Though UT was more taller against Khali than Kane was.
Kane is still at least 1/2 inch taller than UT today. Though UT was more taller against Khali than Kane was.
nick said on 15/Feb/09
Click Here
couple of pictures i put together. It amazez me how well taker compares to khali on two occasions compared to triple h. Taker is max 5 inches shorter and triple h seems to be 10 inches shorter. Triple h also in every encounter is the same height as 6'3 rock.This concludes that in ring gear he is around the same height as a barefoot 6'3 man regardless of how tall you think he is barefoot. He also is 2 inches taller than 6'0.5 (guess) vince.
Click Here
couple of pictures i put together. It amazez me how well taker compares to khali on two occasions compared to triple h. Taker is max 5 inches shorter and triple h seems to be 10 inches shorter. Triple h also in every encounter is the same height as 6'3 rock.This concludes that in ring gear he is around the same height as a barefoot 6'3 man regardless of how tall you think he is barefoot. He also is 2 inches taller than 6'0.5 (guess) vince.
Anonymous said on 15/Feb/09
Right vegas, Taker had bigger boots in 2002. But I don
Right vegas, Taker had bigger boots in 2002. But I don
Vegas said on 15/Feb/09
Red says on 14/Feb/09
Great find Vegas, look at HHH
Red says on 14/Feb/09
Great find Vegas, look at HHH
Haze said on 15/Feb/09
seemed 3 inches taller than randy orton in a match i just watched. so however tall randy orton is. but i did notice that when facing a shorter opponent he does slouch alot. i think his postures playing more in his lower height listings than people think
seemed 3 inches taller than randy orton in a match i just watched. so however tall randy orton is. but i did notice that when facing a shorter opponent he does slouch alot. i think his postures playing more in his lower height listings than people think
Clay said on 15/Feb/09
Kane must be 6'4-6'4.5 after all 4 year vet Danimal exposed him as 2 inches shorter than undertaker.
Kane must be 6'4-6'4.5 after all 4 year vet Danimal exposed him as 2 inches shorter than undertaker.
TELLEM said on 14/Feb/09
Ghost says on 13/Feb/09
Danimal says on 12/Feb/09
Benoit at 5'9.5" is laughable. He's in the 5'8" range. Taker is 6'6"-6'6.5" today.
Benoit looked 3 inches taller than mean Gene in WCW and Taker is 5 inches shorter than Khali.
benoit was in his wrestling boots.
Ghost says on 13/Feb/09
Danimal says on 12/Feb/09
Benoit at 5'9.5" is laughable. He's in the 5'8" range. Taker is 6'6"-6'6.5" today.
Benoit looked 3 inches taller than mean Gene in WCW and Taker is 5 inches shorter than Khali.
benoit was in his wrestling boots.
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.