Add a Comment672 comments
Average Guess (126 Votes)
Peak: 6ft 3.9in (192.8cm)
Current: 6ft 2.96in (190.4cm)
Peak: 6ft 3.9in (192.8cm)
Current: 6ft 2.96in (190.4cm)
Junior Hernandez 1990 said on 9/May/18
I think Selleck can still look 191cm than a flat 6'3.
I think Selleck can still look 191cm than a flat 6'3.
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 29/Apr/18
@Canson
My maternal grandmother's only 5'3" but my maternal grandfather's 6'4" (now shrank to 6'3") so that's probably where my mom and my aunt (5'10") got their tall height from. My paternal grandmother's 5'4" and grandfather 5'10" so that's where my dad got his. My uncles (dad's side) are 6'1" (maybe 6'1.5" peak) and 5'11.5" and aunts (dad's side) are 5'8" and 5'5".
@Canson
My maternal grandmother's only 5'3" but my maternal grandfather's 6'4" (now shrank to 6'3") so that's probably where my mom and my aunt (5'10") got their tall height from. My paternal grandmother's 5'4" and grandfather 5'10" so that's where my dad got his. My uncles (dad's side) are 6'1" (maybe 6'1.5" peak) and 5'11.5" and aunts (dad's side) are 5'8" and 5'5".
Canson said on 28/Apr/18
@Christian: that’s interesting! My grandma (Dad’s Mom) was somewhere around 5’10/5’11
@Christian: that’s interesting! My grandma (Dad’s Mom) was somewhere around 5’10/5’11
Canson said on 27/Apr/18
@Christian: wow you got yours from your mom. My grandmother, (father’s mother) was your father’s height while my grandfather was 6’0”. My father wound up 6’4” and my uncles 6’3 peak (6’2.5 today) and 6’2
@Christian: wow you got yours from your mom. My grandmother, (father’s mother) was your father’s height while my grandfather was 6’0”. My father wound up 6’4” and my uncles 6’3 peak (6’2.5 today) and 6’2
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 26/Apr/18
@Canson
He's 5'10.5" but my mom is 6'0".
@Canson
He's 5'10.5" but my mom is 6'0".
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 25/Apr/18
@Canson
He's 5'10.5" but my mom is 6'0".
@Canson
He's 5'10.5" but my mom is 6'0".
Canson said on 24/Apr/18
@Christian: how tall is your dad?
@Christian: how tall is your dad?
viper said on 24/Apr/18
He's not real fit or anything, but he's always been fairly healthy. He went over 30 years without seeing a doctor.
My 79 year old Uncle is a pretty fit guy and hasn't lost any height at 5-8. He's been 5-8 155 pounds since his 20s, so that makes sense.
He's not real fit or anything, but he's always been fairly healthy. He went over 30 years without seeing a doctor.
My 79 year old Uncle is a pretty fit guy and hasn't lost any height at 5-8. He's been 5-8 155 pounds since his 20s, so that makes sense.
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 24/Apr/18
My dad's in his late 40's so I don't think he lost height yet. Who knows how much he'll lose by the time he hits 70 though.
My dad's in his late 40's so I don't think he lost height yet. Who knows how much he'll lose by the time he hits 70 though.
Canson said on 23/Apr/18
@Rampage: and that’s likely a low for him. Maybe worst case 1/8” lower but usually someone at that age has less of a variance than a guy in his 20s or 30s would. He still clears 6’4” out of bed.
@Rampage: and that’s likely a low for him. Maybe worst case 1/8” lower but usually someone at that age has less of a variance than a guy in his 20s or 30s would. He still clears 6’4” out of bed.
Micky said on 23/Apr/18
@ Viper and Canson - My dad didn't lose any significant height his 60s either (he died before he hit 70 so I can't speak as to even older). All I know is that at age 66 he measured 6-2.25, and he was 6-2.5 in his 20s. I'm 6-3 3/8 or 191.5 cm - I suspect today I'd be a solid cm or 2 taller than Selleck although peak I'd say Selleck could've measured 6'3.5" - 6'3.75" range.
@ Viper and Canson - My dad didn't lose any significant height his 60s either (he died before he hit 70 so I can't speak as to even older). All I know is that at age 66 he measured 6-2.25, and he was 6-2.5 in his 20s. I'm 6-3 3/8 or 191.5 cm - I suspect today I'd be a solid cm or 2 taller than Selleck although peak I'd say Selleck could've measured 6'3.5" - 6'3.75" range.
Canson said on 23/Apr/18
@Junior: if Selleck was 6’3.5 peak it means Conan was likely never over 6’3. It’s possible Selleck was more like 6’3.75 and Conan always 6’3.25. He’s definitely not as tall as Padalecki or even a peak Selleck. Padelecki is a legit 6’4” tho from the looks of it
@Rampage: I agree! It is remarkable to say the least
@Junior: if Selleck was 6’3.5 peak it means Conan was likely never over 6’3. It’s possible Selleck was more like 6’3.75 and Conan always 6’3.25. He’s definitely not as tall as Padalecki or even a peak Selleck. Padelecki is a legit 6’4” tho from the looks of it
@Rampage: I agree! It is remarkable to say the least
Canson said on 23/Apr/18
@Junior: if Selleck was 6’3.5 peak it means Conan was likely never over 6’3. It’s possible Selleck was more like 6’3.75 and Conan always 6’3.25. He’s definitely not as tall as Padalecki or even a peak Selleck. Padelecki is a legit 6’4” tho from the looks of it
@Junior: if Selleck was 6’3.5 peak it means Conan was likely never over 6’3. It’s possible Selleck was more like 6’3.75 and Conan always 6’3.25. He’s definitely not as tall as Padalecki or even a peak Selleck. Padelecki is a legit 6’4” tho from the looks of it
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Apr/18
Yeah he looks around 6ft3 today.
Canson to go from 6ft4 to just under at almost 70 is more than just "not bad" in my book. A lot of guys that age have lost 2in!
Yeah he looks around 6ft3 today.
Canson to go from 6ft4 to just under at almost 70 is more than just "not bad" in my book. A lot of guys that age have lost 2in!
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 22/Apr/18
@viper
He must have a healthy fit lifestyle then. Most 70 year olds lose at least some height to a certain degree.
@viper
He must have a healthy fit lifestyle then. Most 70 year olds lose at least some height to a certain degree.
Canson said on 21/Apr/18
@Viper: my father is 68 and is in a similar boat. He said he measured 6’4 or 6’4.25 at his peak but it’s possible he was a solid 6’4. I know that when I was 16 and hit a solid 6’4 I was the same exact height as he was and today I’m about 1/2” taller. He’s around 6’3.75 today which is not bad for someone his age
@Viper: my father is 68 and is in a similar boat. He said he measured 6’4 or 6’4.25 at his peak but it’s possible he was a solid 6’4. I know that when I was 16 and hit a solid 6’4 I was the same exact height as he was and today I’m about 1/2” taller. He’s around 6’3.75 today which is not bad for someone his age
Junior Hernandez 1990 said on 21/Apr/18
@viper Your dad keep it very well at 70. But i'm not sure if Selleck was ever 6'4 because he always look an inch taller than 6'2.5" Ted Danson.
@viper Your dad keep it very well at 70. But i'm not sure if Selleck was ever 6'4 because he always look an inch taller than 6'2.5" Ted Danson.
viper said on 20/Apr/18
My 70 year old 6-0 dad hasn't lost anything
My 70 year old 6-0 dad hasn't lost anything
viper said on 20/Apr/18
My 70 year old 6-0 dad hasn't lost anything
My 70 year old 6-0 dad hasn't lost anything
Sonnecker said on 20/Apr/18
Height loss is always subjective, and Tom hasn't lost much. Still a full 191 cm at recent sight, I think. 193 cm in youth. 6'3" and a little, maybe a quarter.
Height loss is always subjective, and Tom hasn't lost much. Still a full 191 cm at recent sight, I think. 193 cm in youth. 6'3" and a little, maybe a quarter.
Junior Hernandez 1990 said on 19/Apr/18
My dad 63 had lost a full cm from 182cm peak and 181cm now. I believe a few mm over half inch lost on Selleck will be closer at 73.
Peak 192cm, now 190.5cm
My dad 63 had lost a full cm from 182cm peak and 181cm now. I believe a few mm over half inch lost on Selleck will be closer at 73.
Peak 192cm, now 190.5cm
berta said on 28/Mar/18
have he only lost half inch ? haent seen him in anything last 5 years but it seems very little to loose only half inch at 73 years old? well maybe
Editor Rob
have he only lost half inch ? haent seen him in anything last 5 years but it seems very little to loose only half inch at 73 years old? well maybe
Editor RobPossibly nearer an inch now at 73, up to about 69-70 I'd have said 1/2 inch range.
Streichs said on 5/Mar/18
That’s just the angle of the picture. Selleck is leaning forward to Kline, not standing straight at all and still towering Kline.
That’s just the angle of the picture. Selleck is leaning forward to Kline, not standing straight at all and still towering Kline.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Mar/18
Selleck has a ground advantage in that photo w/h Kline
Selleck has a ground advantage in that photo w/h Kline
Canson said on 16/Feb/18
@Rampage: but the flip side is someone 6’8” at their lowest will be banging heads on doorways worst if they’re in shoes they’re 6’9”. Not a height I would want to be lol. I’m good being strong 6’4” lol
@Rampage: but the flip side is someone 6’8” at their lowest will be banging heads on doorways worst if they’re in shoes they’re 6’9”. Not a height I would want to be lol. I’m good being strong 6’4” lol
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 3/Jan/18
@Manfred
I don't see any advantages of being 6'8" other than maybe basketball and towering over everyone, and IMO it would be incovenient for me, but if your height makes you happy, that's good.
@Manfred
I don't see any advantages of being 6'8" other than maybe basketball and towering over everyone, and IMO it would be incovenient for me, but if your height makes you happy, that's good.
Canson said on 2/Jan/18
@Manfred: that’s impressive. A lot of guys won’t like being that tall. good for you!!
@Manfred: that’s impressive. A lot of guys won’t like being that tall. good for you!!
Manfred said on 27/Dec/17
I'm 6ft8in and I like being tall. It has more advantages than disadvantages.
I'm 6ft8in and I like being tall. It has more advantages than disadvantages.
cobra said on 19/Dec/17
Would be interesting to see Selleck and Hasselhoff together in their primes, both very tall men.
Would be interesting to see Selleck and Hasselhoff together in their primes, both very tall men.
Canson said on 6/Dec/17
Rob 6’5” is into the 99%ile
Rob 6’5” is into the 99%ile
Karriann Drury said on 26/Nov/17
I love Tom I love that he is so tall he is the best actor in the whole world I respect him very much is a gentleman
I love Tom I love that he is so tall he is the best actor in the whole world I respect him very much is a gentleman
Rising - 174 cm said on 18/Nov/17
@Adam: I don't think there's more than 1/4" or so difference in footwear with Chevy, but that's also the biggest height difference I can see between the twpo in the video. Really, I can't tell who is taller there. I believe both men were 6'3.5", but there's a better chance of Selleck being 1/4" to 1/8" more.
Honestly, in Quigley Down Under(good film, imo), Selleck doesn't seem like a clear full 6'4" guy, especially dressed for a Western. I can't say he seemed any taller than a guy like Clint Eastwood did in Westerns.
@Adam: I don't think there's more than 1/4" or so difference in footwear with Chevy, but that's also the biggest height difference I can see between the twpo in the video. Really, I can't tell who is taller there. I believe both men were 6'3.5", but there's a better chance of Selleck being 1/4" to 1/8" more.
Honestly, in Quigley Down Under(good film, imo), Selleck doesn't seem like a clear full 6'4" guy, especially dressed for a Western. I can't say he seemed any taller than a guy like Clint Eastwood did in Westerns.
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 16/Nov/17
@Adam
That's definitely not a foot difference, unless if Selleck had a 12 inch head, which would be preposterous. At most Hillerman looked 10 inches shorter. Click Here
@Adam
That's definitely not a foot difference, unless if Selleck had a 12 inch head, which would be preposterous. At most Hillerman looked 10 inches shorter. Click Here
Adam said on 15/Nov/17
Rampage, no way Mosley was ever 6ft2. The difference between him and Selleck is just too huge as this line up shows :
Click Here
Rampage, no way Mosley was ever 6ft2. The difference between him and Selleck is just too huge as this line up shows :
Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Nov/17
Rob, how tall do you think Roger E. Mosley really is?
I've seen 6ft2 for him but next to Selleck I see more than 2in. I could be wrong though. The camera angles on Magnum were never great for judging height!
Editor Rob
Rob, how tall do you think Roger E. Mosley really is?
I've seen 6ft2 for him but next to Selleck I see more than 2in. I could be wrong though. The camera angles on Magnum were never great for judging height!
Editor Rob 6ft 2 might be a bit optimistic, 6ft 1 maybe is more realistic and under 6ft today.
Adam said on 15/Nov/17
This is Selleck with John Hillerman (supposedly 5ft7 peak). I would say Selleck’s got Hillerman by at least a whole foot, although Hillerman would probably have lost height by then.
Click Here
This is Selleck with John Hillerman (supposedly 5ft7 peak). I would say Selleck’s got Hillerman by at least a whole foot, although Hillerman would probably have lost height by then.
Click Here
Adam said on 10/Nov/17
Rising, this is where Selleck meets Chevy Chase on stage. Yes Selleck’s boots have a prominent heel but Chevy’s footwear are not exactly thin dress shoes either. If you account for the camera angle from the left (where Chevy is positioned) and for posture, I don’t think Chevy’s footwear deficit is going to make up the difference if you can “straighten out” the guy on the right. I think if you ask 10 people which of the two is taller, 9 will give Selleck the nod because the mind adjusts for angle and posture.
Click Here
Rising, this is where Selleck meets Chevy Chase on stage. Yes Selleck’s boots have a prominent heel but Chevy’s footwear are not exactly thin dress shoes either. If you account for the camera angle from the left (where Chevy is positioned) and for posture, I don’t think Chevy’s footwear deficit is going to make up the difference if you can “straighten out” the guy on the right. I think if you ask 10 people which of the two is taller, 9 will give Selleck the nod because the mind adjusts for angle and posture.
Click Here
Adam said on 10/Nov/17
A tall man, movie producer Joe Drake, here with Ashton Kutcher :
Click Here
And with Liam Hemsworth :
Click Here
And with Selleck in 2010 when Selleck was already 65 years old :
Click Here
A tall man, movie producer Joe Drake, here with Ashton Kutcher :
Click Here
And with Liam Hemsworth :
Click Here
And with Selleck in 2010 when Selleck was already 65 years old :
Click Here
Canson said on 29/Oct/17
@Junior: I can agree with Rising on this one maybe 6’3.75 peak and today closer to 6’3. I think the diff between he and Conan is 1/2” maybe a cm. He made him 6’4/6’5 just like he told Neeson that he’s 6’5 and Wlad that he’s 6’6/6’7 and tippy toed to try to be as tall as hasselhoff did. IMHO Conan looks more 191cm peak (no hair of course) especially comparing him to John Lithgow. I don’t think Conan has lost a lot of height tho prob less than a 1/4” prob. He’s younger than most of those guys. It’s His long hair makes him appear taller than he is to go with his limbs. But Lithgow also edged him by near an inch too. At least half to 3/4.
@Junior: I can agree with Rising on this one maybe 6’3.75 peak and today closer to 6’3. I think the diff between he and Conan is 1/2” maybe a cm. He made him 6’4/6’5 just like he told Neeson that he’s 6’5 and Wlad that he’s 6’6/6’7 and tippy toed to try to be as tall as hasselhoff did. IMHO Conan looks more 191cm peak (no hair of course) especially comparing him to John Lithgow. I don’t think Conan has lost a lot of height tho prob less than a 1/4” prob. He’s younger than most of those guys. It’s His long hair makes him appear taller than he is to go with his limbs. But Lithgow also edged him by near an inch too. At least half to 3/4.
James B said on 29/Oct/17
Rob too be fair 6ft6 and a half isn't that much bigger than 6'4. I'd putt 6'6 in the same category as 6'4 personally.
If his brothers were both 6ft10 then you could argue it would be strange.
Editor Rob
Rob too be fair 6ft6 and a half isn't that much bigger than 6'4. I'd putt 6'6 in the same category as 6'4 personally.
If his brothers were both 6ft10 then you could argue it would be strange.
Editor Rob I think it is noticeable to people if 6ft 6 or 6ft 4, suddenly you go into 99+ percentile range.
Junior said on 20/Oct/17
I did say correct listing here. 193cm peak with loose posture he can look 191 - 192cm and not over 192cm now maybe fraction low since he was 72 now.
I did say correct listing here. 193cm peak with loose posture he can look 191 - 192cm and not over 192cm now maybe fraction low since he was 72 now.
Rising - 174 cm said on 15/Oct/17
@Anonymous: I'm referring to the video of Selleck on Chevy's talk show: Click Here The two look just about identical there, imo. The comparison is a bit brief, but a much better reference to me than the lone photo which shows Selleck standing noticeably in front of Chase and if you took every person's apparent height at face value in that pic, the conclusions would be contradictory. I think it makes sense both were legit 6'3.5" guys who rounded up to 6'4". I do see Selleck at 6'3.5" and Danson at 6'2.5", but I don't think there's really visual proof to show whether he's 6'3.5" or 6'4" either way and what I mean is he can look both. His tendency to slouch may make him look shorter at times, but as I've shown, he's also worn pretty thick boots, such as that appearance above, so that could account for some taller appearances as well. I think the real proof is Selleck claiming the more specific 6'3.5" at least twice. The usual 6'4" claim is not something I view as contradictory as this could be accounted for by normal rounding, but rounding down from 6'4" to 6'3.5" -- especially post-stardom in the 80's -- does not make sense to me, unless he really he is that height. But I think there is a bit of breathing room there as one of the times he said "about" 6'3.5" so that could mean something 6'3 5/8" for instance, even 6'3 3/4" like John Wayne apparently was in his prime. But the number of 6'4" men who round down to 6'3.5" will be much fewer than vice versa. If anything, I'd expect the self conscious 6'4" man to round down to say 6'3" as it'd be more effective.
@Rampage: I agree. His slouching makes it difficult for me to tell exactly, but I'd bet somewhere in the 6'2.75" to 6'3" range nowadays at 72 years old. He can still look a lot taller than Donnie Wahlberg when Donnie isn't on his toes and I'd put Donnie around 177 cm.
@Anonymous: I'm referring to the video of Selleck on Chevy's talk show: Click Here The two look just about identical there, imo. The comparison is a bit brief, but a much better reference to me than the lone photo which shows Selleck standing noticeably in front of Chase and if you took every person's apparent height at face value in that pic, the conclusions would be contradictory. I think it makes sense both were legit 6'3.5" guys who rounded up to 6'4". I do see Selleck at 6'3.5" and Danson at 6'2.5", but I don't think there's really visual proof to show whether he's 6'3.5" or 6'4" either way and what I mean is he can look both. His tendency to slouch may make him look shorter at times, but as I've shown, he's also worn pretty thick boots, such as that appearance above, so that could account for some taller appearances as well. I think the real proof is Selleck claiming the more specific 6'3.5" at least twice. The usual 6'4" claim is not something I view as contradictory as this could be accounted for by normal rounding, but rounding down from 6'4" to 6'3.5" -- especially post-stardom in the 80's -- does not make sense to me, unless he really he is that height. But I think there is a bit of breathing room there as one of the times he said "about" 6'3.5" so that could mean something 6'3 5/8" for instance, even 6'3 3/4" like John Wayne apparently was in his prime. But the number of 6'4" men who round down to 6'3.5" will be much fewer than vice versa. If anything, I'd expect the self conscious 6'4" man to round down to say 6'3" as it'd be more effective.
@Rampage: I agree. His slouching makes it difficult for me to tell exactly, but I'd bet somewhere in the 6'2.75" to 6'3" range nowadays at 72 years old. He can still look a lot taller than Donnie Wahlberg when Donnie isn't on his toes and I'd put Donnie around 177 cm.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 13/Oct/17
6ft3 flat today
6ft3 flat today
Anonymous said on 13/Oct/17
Rising, I don't think Chevy Chase is any proof of Selleck being sub 6ft4. On the contrary, the picture of the two together suggests otherwise. But your pics with Selleck and Ted Danson are another story. There I do think you have a point. If you compare David Hasselhoff and Dennis Haysbert with Danson (and there are many pics of them together), Hasselhoff and Haysbert do seem to edge Danson by a greater margin than Selleck does.
Rising, I don't think Chevy Chase is any proof of Selleck being sub 6ft4. On the contrary, the picture of the two together suggests otherwise. But your pics with Selleck and Ted Danson are another story. There I do think you have a point. If you compare David Hasselhoff and Dennis Haysbert with Danson (and there are many pics of them together), Hasselhoff and Haysbert do seem to edge Danson by a greater margin than Selleck does.
Rising - 174 cm said on 30/Sep/17
There's a much better chance of Tim Robbins being a full 6'5" than Selleck having been a full 6'4", imo. I'm not necessarily saying Robbins was taller than 6'4.5"-6'4.75", imo, but it'd make more sense if he tried shaving off a half an inch rather than Selleck.
@Canson: I agree that Goldblum was most likely of the bunch to hit 6'4.25", though seeing him nowadays look 6'3.5" tops with Liam Hemsworth, I'm not certain he was over 6'4" flat.
Editor Rob
There's a much better chance of Tim Robbins being a full 6'5" than Selleck having been a full 6'4", imo. I'm not necessarily saying Robbins was taller than 6'4.5"-6'4.75", imo, but it'd make more sense if he tried shaving off a half an inch rather than Selleck.
@Canson: I agree that Goldblum was most likely of the bunch to hit 6'4.25", though seeing him nowadays look 6'3.5" tops with Liam Hemsworth, I'm not certain he was over 6'4" flat.
Editor Rob incidentally, growing up with his brothers, it must have been strange at 6ft 4 having 2 brothers 6ft 6 and a half as he claimed they were!
Canson said on 22/Sep/17
@Rising: agree mostly. I think Conan measures 6'4.5 in shoes early in the day. He's prob 6'3 or 6'3.25 barefoot (not counting hair) at night. I think Hoff is 6'4 peak and with Neeson he could be peak as well. Goldblum is the likeliest to be over that number.
@Rising: agree mostly. I think Conan measures 6'4.5 in shoes early in the day. He's prob 6'3 or 6'3.25 barefoot (not counting hair) at night. I think Hoff is 6'4 peak and with Neeson he could be peak as well. Goldblum is the likeliest to be over that number.
Anonymous said on 18/Sep/17
He is like david hasselhoff in some sense he hasn't even lost any of his height as he has become older.All these tall men become leading actors in films! There never ugly looking.
He is like david hasselhoff in some sense he hasn't even lost any of his height as he has become older.All these tall men become leading actors in films! There never ugly looking.
Rising - 174 cm said on 16/Sep/17
I'm not sure Rob thinks Selleck is still 6'3.5" or if he just hasn't updated this as iirc, Rob had Selleck at a current height of 6'3.5" quite a few years ago now. Imo, 6'3.5" was more his peak height, which he held into his 60s, but I'd guess him 6'3" max now at 72, probably about 190 cm. He could have been a bit taller than 6'3.5" peak, though. Perhaps a 1/4" to 1/8" above so I think 192 cm to 190 so a 2 cm loss, possibly even a full inch. Still not bad height loss as well, especially for a big man with a tendency to slouch.
I'm not sure Rob thinks Selleck is still 6'3.5" or if he just hasn't updated this as iirc, Rob had Selleck at a current height of 6'3.5" quite a few years ago now. Imo, 6'3.5" was more his peak height, which he held into his 60s, but I'd guess him 6'3" max now at 72, probably about 190 cm. He could have been a bit taller than 6'3.5" peak, though. Perhaps a 1/4" to 1/8" above so I think 192 cm to 190 so a 2 cm loss, possibly even a full inch. Still not bad height loss as well, especially for a big man with a tendency to slouch.
berta said on 11/Sep/17
1 cm loss and over 70 years old he is like morgan freeman, very good genetics.
1 cm loss and over 70 years old he is like morgan freeman, very good genetics.
Rising - 174 cm said on 6/Sep/17
@Canson: Well, Selleck looked a couple of inches taller than Conan in 1998, but with an angle, footwear and probably posture advantage. But Selleck does look a fraction taller in 2004 in a better comparison: Click Here I think Selleck had held onto his solid 6'3.5" by that point as he doesn't even look to have thick boots that time. But 1/8" to 1/4" over is possible as well. I just think he must be a 6'3" and fraction guy otherwise it's nonsensical for him to be one of the few to claim it. But it's not based purely on that. There have been times to me where Selleck hasn't quite looked the full 6'4". Obviously he does at other times, but then will get at least a fraction from those thicker style boots I showed him wearing on talk shows. As for Conan, I believe he measured 6'4.5" in shoes.
I mostly agree with the rest in that I give Lithgow the solid 6'4" and like Selleck, he held onto his height into his 60s. Hasselhoff was definitely the full 6'4" as he's at least close to it even now. Goldblum may have been that tall, but I don't see Neeson quite that, more of a flat 6'4", imo. I didn't see either of those two with Conan, so I can't comment on how they looked with him, but insisting Neeson was 6'5" suggests Conan saw him as taller than himself.
@Canson: Well, Selleck looked a couple of inches taller than Conan in 1998, but with an angle, footwear and probably posture advantage. But Selleck does look a fraction taller in 2004 in a better comparison: Click Here I think Selleck had held onto his solid 6'3.5" by that point as he doesn't even look to have thick boots that time. But 1/8" to 1/4" over is possible as well. I just think he must be a 6'3" and fraction guy otherwise it's nonsensical for him to be one of the few to claim it. But it's not based purely on that. There have been times to me where Selleck hasn't quite looked the full 6'4". Obviously he does at other times, but then will get at least a fraction from those thicker style boots I showed him wearing on talk shows. As for Conan, I believe he measured 6'4.5" in shoes.
I mostly agree with the rest in that I give Lithgow the solid 6'4" and like Selleck, he held onto his height into his 60s. Hasselhoff was definitely the full 6'4" as he's at least close to it even now. Goldblum may have been that tall, but I don't see Neeson quite that, more of a flat 6'4", imo. I didn't see either of those two with Conan, so I can't comment on how they looked with him, but insisting Neeson was 6'5" suggests Conan saw him as taller than himself.
Canson said on 4/Sep/17
@Rising: I agree with you and Christian. Selleck was probably peak max 6'3.75 at his lowest maybe even 5/8. But maybe when he was on Conans show he still was that height. He only edged Conan by 1/2" prob esp when Conan asked him "what are you 6'4/6'5?" Conan for sure was never a legit 6'4" he likely was either hair included or was a guy who measured 6'3.5-.75 like an hour out of bed and was max 6'3.25. Because of his hair I wouldn't rule him out as only being a flat 6'3 peak either. His hair alone gives him an edge slightly over a lot unless they have similar hair to him. But Christian is correct neither of these guys is as tall as Hasselhoff or Lithgow imho. I think both were solid 6'4" peak and Neeson and Goldblum both prob could go 193.5 peak at night both edged Conan pretty well like 2cm to an inch
@Rising: I agree with you and Christian. Selleck was probably peak max 6'3.75 at his lowest maybe even 5/8. But maybe when he was on Conans show he still was that height. He only edged Conan by 1/2" prob esp when Conan asked him "what are you 6'4/6'5?" Conan for sure was never a legit 6'4" he likely was either hair included or was a guy who measured 6'3.5-.75 like an hour out of bed and was max 6'3.25. Because of his hair I wouldn't rule him out as only being a flat 6'3 peak either. His hair alone gives him an edge slightly over a lot unless they have similar hair to him. But Christian is correct neither of these guys is as tall as Hasselhoff or Lithgow imho. I think both were solid 6'4" peak and Neeson and Goldblum both prob could go 193.5 peak at night both edged Conan pretty well like 2cm to an inch
Arch Stanton said on 4/Sep/17
Selleck could look at least 2.5 inches taller than John Vernon in the Sacketts and we have Vernon at 6'2!
Selleck could look at least 2.5 inches taller than John Vernon in the Sacketts and we have Vernon at 6'2!
Rising - 174 cm said on 3/Sep/17
This is a case I agree with Christian. People often guess the round number for convenience, but there will be just as many 6'3.75" and 6'4.25" guys. I'm 99% sure Selleck was either 6'3.5" or 6'3.75" peak since he even claimed 6'3.5" at least twice in the 80s, but said "about" on one of them, which could easily mean 6'3 5/8" for instance. But Selleck and another admitted 6'3.5" guy who sometimes rounded up to 6'4" Chevy Chase looked pretty much identical on Chevy's talk show in 1993. I think Tom maintained a peak height of 6'3.5" (possibly even a 1/8" to 1/4" over) until his 60s, but is now 6'2.75"-6'3" range. He can still tower a 177 cm guy Donnie Wahlberg, though as evidenced by the fact that Donnie is ALWAYS way up on his toes when he appears with Tom at Blue Bloods promos.
I doubt he'd have claimed 6'3.5" twice over a half dozen years apart had it been an error. More likely, many honest 6'3.5" guys round up to 6'4" as Tom often does. There's always a better chance that a claim is accurate when it's a 1/4" or 1/2". It doesn't mean it is necessarily accurate as evidenced by the Stallones, McConaugheys and Rob Lowes of the world, but when people claim a height of feet/inches without a fraction, it shouldn't always be taken as exact since most people I know round from quarter or even half inches. Most 5'9.5" guys who round to 5'10" don't think of themselves as lying.
This is a case I agree with Christian. People often guess the round number for convenience, but there will be just as many 6'3.75" and 6'4.25" guys. I'm 99% sure Selleck was either 6'3.5" or 6'3.75" peak since he even claimed 6'3.5" at least twice in the 80s, but said "about" on one of them, which could easily mean 6'3 5/8" for instance. But Selleck and another admitted 6'3.5" guy who sometimes rounded up to 6'4" Chevy Chase looked pretty much identical on Chevy's talk show in 1993. I think Tom maintained a peak height of 6'3.5" (possibly even a 1/8" to 1/4" over) until his 60s, but is now 6'2.75"-6'3" range. He can still tower a 177 cm guy Donnie Wahlberg, though as evidenced by the fact that Donnie is ALWAYS way up on his toes when he appears with Tom at Blue Bloods promos.
I doubt he'd have claimed 6'3.5" twice over a half dozen years apart had it been an error. More likely, many honest 6'3.5" guys round up to 6'4" as Tom often does. There's always a better chance that a claim is accurate when it's a 1/4" or 1/2". It doesn't mean it is necessarily accurate as evidenced by the Stallones, McConaugheys and Rob Lowes of the world, but when people claim a height of feet/inches without a fraction, it shouldn't always be taken as exact since most people I know round from quarter or even half inches. Most 5'9.5" guys who round to 5'10" don't think of themselves as lying.
postmanjones said on 1/Sep/17
Tom Selleck definitely around 6ft4 in his prime
Tom Selleck definitely around 6ft4 in his prime
Timothy Jones said on 31/Aug/17
Strong 6 foot 4 in magnum PI.
Strong 6 foot 4 in magnum PI.
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 30/Aug/17
@James B
Probably not, maybe he measured 6'3.75" and decided to round down to 6'3.5" instead of rounding up to 6'4". I never saw Selleck as a solid 6'4" unlike guys like Hasselhoff.
@James B
Probably not, maybe he measured 6'3.75" and decided to round down to 6'3.5" instead of rounding up to 6'4". I never saw Selleck as a solid 6'4" unlike guys like Hasselhoff.
James B said on 22/Aug/17
Rob do you think he made an error in measuring himself when he claimed 6'3.5?
Rob do you think he made an error in measuring himself when he claimed 6'3.5?
Rising - 174 cm said on 5/Aug/17
I'll give Danson 6'2.5" or a strong 189 cm and Selleck 6'3.5" or close to 192: Click Here Click Here If I'm wrong about Selleck being an honest 6'3.5" peak who rounded up to 6'4" then I'd say split the difference between the 6'3.5" and 6'4" claims and give him 6'3.75". But I'd give him the same as Chevy Chase in his prime. Both are probably about 190 cm today.
@Canson: As a follow up on our discussion of Selleck's height today. The photo above is an example of why I think Selleck may have dipped below 6'3" today since if Moynahan goes from 177 cm barefoot to 185 cm in heels then Selleck really only looks about 191 cm in shoes above. I can see him straightening up more, so it's difficult to say just how much, but that's my best guess for now. I mean as difficult as it is to believe, Tom is 72. But 2 cm loss wouldn't be bad at all for early 70s.
I'll give Danson 6'2.5" or a strong 189 cm and Selleck 6'3.5" or close to 192: Click Here Click Here If I'm wrong about Selleck being an honest 6'3.5" peak who rounded up to 6'4" then I'd say split the difference between the 6'3.5" and 6'4" claims and give him 6'3.75". But I'd give him the same as Chevy Chase in his prime. Both are probably about 190 cm today.
@Canson: As a follow up on our discussion of Selleck's height today. The photo above is an example of why I think Selleck may have dipped below 6'3" today since if Moynahan goes from 177 cm barefoot to 185 cm in heels then Selleck really only looks about 191 cm in shoes above. I can see him straightening up more, so it's difficult to say just how much, but that's my best guess for now. I mean as difficult as it is to believe, Tom is 72. But 2 cm loss wouldn't be bad at all for early 70s.
Canson said on 3/Aug/17
@Richard Spain: Selleck may be 192-193 peak meaning maybe he was 6'3.75. He claimed both 6'3.5 and 6'4. But that sheds light on how tall Conan really is he for sure isn't 6'4 when he's calling someone else who's taller than him and may not even be 6'4" complete 6'4/6'5 like he called Selleck
@Richard Spain: Selleck may be 192-193 peak meaning maybe he was 6'3.75. He claimed both 6'3.5 and 6'4. But that sheds light on how tall Conan really is he for sure isn't 6'4 when he's calling someone else who's taller than him and may not even be 6'4" complete 6'4/6'5 like he called Selleck
RichardSpain said on 2/Aug/17
Who is a strong 193cm is David Hasselhoff.
Tom selleck I think was 192 cm in peak and 189/190 cm nowadays.
Here next to Steve Guttenberg and Ted Danson.
Click Here
Steve Guttenberg seems 181 cm
Ted Danson between 187/188 cm
Tom 192 cm Max.
Barefoot.
Who is a strong 193cm is David Hasselhoff.
Tom selleck I think was 192 cm in peak and 189/190 cm nowadays.
Here next to Steve Guttenberg and Ted Danson.
Click Here
Steve Guttenberg seems 181 cm
Ted Danson between 187/188 cm
Tom 192 cm Max.
Barefoot.
Rising - 174 cm said on 1/Aug/17
Thanks, Rob.
@Canson: I disagree with you to some extent on Conan and Selleck because if we disregard camera positions, footwear and posture, Conan didn't look much taller with Selleck than 5'10" Patrick Swayze did in nearly a decade earlier: Click Here As you can see, I uploaded 4 pics from a 1990 event of Swayze and Selleck and one from '89. Swayze has a noticeable posture advantage and a bit of a camera advantage as well, but Selleck winds up looking 6'1" in some of those comparisons, or 6'2" at most. Obviously, he's much taller than that and for all I know, Swayze might have worn lifts, but it's an example of why I'm wary of comparisons with too many factors.
Now that is Selleck looking shorter than usual with Swayze. In general, he didn't always seem as towering as a legit 6'4", like a Dolph Lundgren type to me. That's why I think he was honest when he said 6'3.5" and other times just rounded up like many do. I don't think he cared about his height either way, but the sheer number of times Selleck said 6'4" pretty much debunks the idea he didn't want people to think he was that tall. I take Selleck's word for it, just like I take Chevy Chase's word he was 6'3.5". Not surprisingly to me, both looked pretty much identical on Chevy's talk show in the early 90s. Selleck did have some pretty thick boots again on that show, just as he had with Letterman and a number of other appearances, which would explain why he'd look the full 6'4" at 6'3.5" barefoot. I just don't see any reason he'd have said 6'3.5" at least twice if he was a full 6'4" in afternoon. There was a poster on the Conan page who thought he was 6'4" because he was an inch taller than Ted Danson who that poster thought was 6'3", but if you put Danson at 6'2.5" as I do then that poster would have to concede Selleck looks 6'3.5" by their own estimate. Sometimes people think someone is taller by comparing them to someone who is shorter than they think. Hell, that caused me to overestimate countless celebs during the Glenn days.
As for today, I don't think Selleck is actually 188-189 as he looks above, which is probably because of posture, but I do think his days of being over 6'3" are gone. I'd give him 190 cm to a flat 6'3" today.
But I'll say this, while I don't read too much into Selleck's appearance on Conan, I don't believe Conan is taller than Selleck, partially because I don't think Conan thought he was taller than Selleck, otherwise he wouldn't guess him at 6'4"-6'5". I haven't checked to see if my post on Conan's page went through, but if it did, you'll see Selleck's boots probably gave him an advantage, but even so, we're talking a fraction. It's very possible Selleck did appear taller than Conan that day, but I think the camera as well as Conan bending forward made it impossible to say for sure.
I'll try to look at the Conan comparisons you mention that I haven't seen(Haysbert and Mangianello). I'd agree that Conan's comment to Neeson implies Neeson is taller as well and as I agreed, Lithgow really did look taller to me. I'd say both are simply a full 6'4", but not taller. I think people always have a tendency to exaggerate how tall legit 6'4" guys are without realizing how tall that truly is. Go on almost every single page and you see it. I'm talking people who you, me and Rob would all agree are 6'4" flat. My best guess for Conan right now is 6'3.5". I don't think he's a legit 6'4", but our main difference is I don't completely rule it out. I'd be surprised if he's less than 6'3.5", but I'll keep an open mind to 191 cm as well. But I suspect Conan measured 6'4.5" in shoes and then other times just rounds up to 6'4", so that would suggest 6'3.5".
I'm more certain about Selleck than Conan since more often than not, I don't think people claim to be shorter than they really are. Many claim to be taller, though and do so at all heights.
Thanks, Rob.
@Canson: I disagree with you to some extent on Conan and Selleck because if we disregard camera positions, footwear and posture, Conan didn't look much taller with Selleck than 5'10" Patrick Swayze did in nearly a decade earlier: Click Here As you can see, I uploaded 4 pics from a 1990 event of Swayze and Selleck and one from '89. Swayze has a noticeable posture advantage and a bit of a camera advantage as well, but Selleck winds up looking 6'1" in some of those comparisons, or 6'2" at most. Obviously, he's much taller than that and for all I know, Swayze might have worn lifts, but it's an example of why I'm wary of comparisons with too many factors.
Now that is Selleck looking shorter than usual with Swayze. In general, he didn't always seem as towering as a legit 6'4", like a Dolph Lundgren type to me. That's why I think he was honest when he said 6'3.5" and other times just rounded up like many do. I don't think he cared about his height either way, but the sheer number of times Selleck said 6'4" pretty much debunks the idea he didn't want people to think he was that tall. I take Selleck's word for it, just like I take Chevy Chase's word he was 6'3.5". Not surprisingly to me, both looked pretty much identical on Chevy's talk show in the early 90s. Selleck did have some pretty thick boots again on that show, just as he had with Letterman and a number of other appearances, which would explain why he'd look the full 6'4" at 6'3.5" barefoot. I just don't see any reason he'd have said 6'3.5" at least twice if he was a full 6'4" in afternoon. There was a poster on the Conan page who thought he was 6'4" because he was an inch taller than Ted Danson who that poster thought was 6'3", but if you put Danson at 6'2.5" as I do then that poster would have to concede Selleck looks 6'3.5" by their own estimate. Sometimes people think someone is taller by comparing them to someone who is shorter than they think. Hell, that caused me to overestimate countless celebs during the Glenn days.
As for today, I don't think Selleck is actually 188-189 as he looks above, which is probably because of posture, but I do think his days of being over 6'3" are gone. I'd give him 190 cm to a flat 6'3" today.
But I'll say this, while I don't read too much into Selleck's appearance on Conan, I don't believe Conan is taller than Selleck, partially because I don't think Conan thought he was taller than Selleck, otherwise he wouldn't guess him at 6'4"-6'5". I haven't checked to see if my post on Conan's page went through, but if it did, you'll see Selleck's boots probably gave him an advantage, but even so, we're talking a fraction. It's very possible Selleck did appear taller than Conan that day, but I think the camera as well as Conan bending forward made it impossible to say for sure.
I'll try to look at the Conan comparisons you mention that I haven't seen(Haysbert and Mangianello). I'd agree that Conan's comment to Neeson implies Neeson is taller as well and as I agreed, Lithgow really did look taller to me. I'd say both are simply a full 6'4", but not taller. I think people always have a tendency to exaggerate how tall legit 6'4" guys are without realizing how tall that truly is. Go on almost every single page and you see it. I'm talking people who you, me and Rob would all agree are 6'4" flat. My best guess for Conan right now is 6'3.5". I don't think he's a legit 6'4", but our main difference is I don't completely rule it out. I'd be surprised if he's less than 6'3.5", but I'll keep an open mind to 191 cm as well. But I suspect Conan measured 6'4.5" in shoes and then other times just rounds up to 6'4", so that would suggest 6'3.5".
I'm more certain about Selleck than Conan since more often than not, I don't think people claim to be shorter than they really are. Many claim to be taller, though and do so at all heights.
Canson said on 31/Jul/17
@Rising: true. it's weird it does look a lot more like 2cm or an inch from an angle but maybe 1/2" or a cm is accurate like you said. I personally have Conan as 191solid 6'3.25 only because it's been established by pics and his words that he's not as tall as at least Liam Neeson or as tall as Selleck. Lithgow and Hasselhoff while he didn't acknowledge both are clearly also taller as was Haysbert and even Joe Mangianello while possibly my size a strong 6'4 maybe even (a very strong 6'4 or weak 6'5) edged him by an inch too, so I can buy a 190cm Liam. Rob has him as around 6'3" that can easily mean 190cm and a little under the mark per se. He had Anthony Joshua as around 6'6" so I surmise for him that he's at least a full 197cm. I can agree as will many that a full cm isn't that easy to spot nor is the specific shoe type in all cases. There are some casual shoes that appear that way in nature but could have a bit of padding inside that can add to it especially if the inside is curved a bit. Also as mentioned 1/2cm isn't all that easy to tell honestly. Meaning if Hemsworth is 190 vs 190.5 or even if he dipped to like 189.8 it's a 0.7cm diff
@Rising: true. it's weird it does look a lot more like 2cm or an inch from an angle but maybe 1/2" or a cm is accurate like you said. I personally have Conan as 191solid 6'3.25 only because it's been established by pics and his words that he's not as tall as at least Liam Neeson or as tall as Selleck. Lithgow and Hasselhoff while he didn't acknowledge both are clearly also taller as was Haysbert and even Joe Mangianello while possibly my size a strong 6'4 maybe even (a very strong 6'4 or weak 6'5) edged him by an inch too, so I can buy a 190cm Liam. Rob has him as around 6'3" that can easily mean 190cm and a little under the mark per se. He had Anthony Joshua as around 6'6" so I surmise for him that he's at least a full 197cm. I can agree as will many that a full cm isn't that easy to spot nor is the specific shoe type in all cases. There are some casual shoes that appear that way in nature but could have a bit of padding inside that can add to it especially if the inside is curved a bit. Also as mentioned 1/2cm isn't all that easy to tell honestly. Meaning if Hemsworth is 190 vs 190.5 or even if he dipped to like 189.8 it's a 0.7cm diff
Rising - 174 cm said on 30/Jul/17
Rob, since you saw the 6'3.5" claim as well, maybe it'd be good to add it to the top of the page as a poster on another page is actually doubting Selleck claimed it. Also, maybe it's time for at least a 6'3" current height. His relaxed posture makes him look closer to 6'3" in shoes in the photo above if Moynahan is 6'1" in heels.
Editor Rob
Rob, since you saw the 6'3.5" claim as well, maybe it'd be good to add it to the top of the page as a poster on another page is actually doubting Selleck claimed it. Also, maybe it's time for at least a 6'3" current height. His relaxed posture makes him look closer to 6'3" in shoes in the photo above if Moynahan is 6'1" in heels.
Editor Rob I'll mention it, as it definitely exists, I just didn't add it at the time.
RisingForce said on 2/Jul/17
Canson, as for Conan, his exact words were "I'm about your height." As I said, if you want to interpret Conan guessing him 6'4"-6'5" as an indication Conan thought Tom was taller, that's reasonable since Conan has typically only claimed to be 6'4" then 6'4.5" on another occasion. But all I'm saying is I'm not convinced the "I'm not" part was referring to height. That's just my interpretation. I'm starting to suspect Conan may only be 6'3.5" myself. I do think Selleck's boots may have given him an edge over Conan's dress shoes, but yeah, he looked shorter than legit 6'4" Lithgow to me and he must have viewed Neeson as taller than himself to guess him 6'5". I suspect Conan may be 6'4.5" in dress shoes, but I agree to some extent about his hair. Remember the photos I posted of Conan and Liam Hemsworth recently? At first glance, Conan can look about an inch taller, but when you factor in hair, you can see it's maybe 1 cm.
Canson, as for Conan, his exact words were "I'm about your height." As I said, if you want to interpret Conan guessing him 6'4"-6'5" as an indication Conan thought Tom was taller, that's reasonable since Conan has typically only claimed to be 6'4" then 6'4.5" on another occasion. But all I'm saying is I'm not convinced the "I'm not" part was referring to height. That's just my interpretation. I'm starting to suspect Conan may only be 6'3.5" myself. I do think Selleck's boots may have given him an edge over Conan's dress shoes, but yeah, he looked shorter than legit 6'4" Lithgow to me and he must have viewed Neeson as taller than himself to guess him 6'5". I suspect Conan may be 6'4.5" in dress shoes, but I agree to some extent about his hair. Remember the photos I posted of Conan and Liam Hemsworth recently? At first glance, Conan can look about an inch taller, but when you factor in hair, you can see it's maybe 1 cm.
Canson said on 24/Jun/17
@Rising force: I would've thought peak ford was 6'1" but because I heard his height mentioned as that in the Fugitive. I don't think he ever was that ad his lowest tho. You have it right. 6'0.25-.5
@Rising force: I would've thought peak ford was 6'1" but because I heard his height mentioned as that in the Fugitive. I don't think he ever was that ad his lowest tho. You have it right. 6'0.25-.5
RisingForce said on 20/Jun/17
I don't see a full inch with Eisner. Might be if Selleck stood straighter, but not as they're standing there.
I don't see a full inch with Eisner. Might be if Selleck stood straighter, but not as they're standing there.
Adam said on 17/Jun/17
Michael Eisner, former boss of Walt Disney is atall guy and in many pics he towers various celebs. His height of 6ft3 is invariably mentioned in articles about him. Here he is with 6ft1,5 Schwarzenegger, the latter with footwear advantage, with 6ft1 Jim Henson and with Selleck. A young Selleck is clearly taller by what seems to be at least an inch. Click Here
Michael Eisner, former boss of Walt Disney is atall guy and in many pics he towers various celebs. His height of 6ft3 is invariably mentioned in articles about him. Here he is with 6ft1,5 Schwarzenegger, the latter with footwear advantage, with 6ft1 Jim Henson and with Selleck. A young Selleck is clearly taller by what seems to be at least an inch. Click Here
RisingForce said on 15/Jun/17
Hanks is leaning a bit himself, but definitely standing straighter than Selleck and I agree he has the advantages, that's why the difference between them only looks 2" max in that photo as opposed to the probable real difference of 3.5" minimum or 4". And I agree with Canson about Ford. 6'0.5" max, imo, maybe 6'0.25". He never looked taller than that to me with 5'11" Billy Dee Williams. Was that picture from the early 90s? If so, Ford at 50ish could have very well been a flat 6 feet. By the time of The Devil's Own half a decade later, that looked the most he could be with Brad Pitt, even considering Pitt might wear lifts. I agree Selleck had at least 3" on Ford, but like I say Ford at anything over 6'0.5" is difficult for me to buy. Look at him with Sean Connery in the late 80s, who was probably 187 cm range then.
Hanks is leaning a bit himself, but definitely standing straighter than Selleck and I agree he has the advantages, that's why the difference between them only looks 2" max in that photo as opposed to the probable real difference of 3.5" minimum or 4". And I agree with Canson about Ford. 6'0.5" max, imo, maybe 6'0.25". He never looked taller than that to me with 5'11" Billy Dee Williams. Was that picture from the early 90s? If so, Ford at 50ish could have very well been a flat 6 feet. By the time of The Devil's Own half a decade later, that looked the most he could be with Brad Pitt, even considering Pitt might wear lifts. I agree Selleck had at least 3" on Ford, but like I say Ford at anything over 6'0.5" is difficult for me to buy. Look at him with Sean Connery in the late 80s, who was probably 187 cm range then.
Canson said on 15/Jun/17
@Adam: if going with 3" that makes Selleck about what rising force says he is. I thought ford was a legit 6'1" before but now see persuasive enough evidence to say he's 6'0.5 or 6' and change. So that puts selleck at 6'3.5ish like he said. However as far as camera angles and the way he uses them I do agree on that aspect
@Adam: if going with 3" that makes Selleck about what rising force says he is. I thought ford was a legit 6'1" before but now see persuasive enough evidence to say he's 6'0.5 or 6' and change. So that puts selleck at 6'3.5ish like he said. However as far as camera angles and the way he uses them I do agree on that aspect
Sandy Cowell said on 14/Jun/17
In his 'Magnum' days, there were plenty of articles written about Tom, and his height of 6ft4 was always one of the first things mentioned about him!
He's been lucky to have only lost half an inch, if that is truly the case! High heels she may be wearing, but the girl standing next to Tom, Bridget Moynahan, must be a very tall woman! With the help of her shoes, she can virtually look Tom straight in the face!
I'm going to give Tom 6ft4 for his peak and 6ft3 for today's height!
In his 'Magnum' days, there were plenty of articles written about Tom, and his height of 6ft4 was always one of the first things mentioned about him!
He's been lucky to have only lost half an inch, if that is truly the case! High heels she may be wearing, but the girl standing next to Tom, Bridget Moynahan, must be a very tall woman! With the help of her shoes, she can virtually look Tom straight in the face!
I'm going to give Tom 6ft4 for his peak and 6ft3 for today's height!
Adam said on 14/Jun/17
RisingForce, but if you want to dissect the picture of Selleck with Chase, Tom Hanks and others for angles and distances from the camera and if you want to draw conclusions about Selleck's edge over Hanks (although the one is slouching and the other wears cowboy boots) you must also admit that a youngish Harrison Ford stands at no disadvantage to Selleck in that pic howsoever. At least you must admit it presents an almost perfect height comparison between Selleck and Ford. Again, a slouching Selleck edges 6ft1 Ford by what seems to be at least 3 inch.
RisingForce, but if you want to dissect the picture of Selleck with Chase, Tom Hanks and others for angles and distances from the camera and if you want to draw conclusions about Selleck's edge over Hanks (although the one is slouching and the other wears cowboy boots) you must also admit that a youngish Harrison Ford stands at no disadvantage to Selleck in that pic howsoever. At least you must admit it presents an almost perfect height comparison between Selleck and Ford. Again, a slouching Selleck edges 6ft1 Ford by what seems to be at least 3 inch.
Canson said on 13/Jun/17
Rising force: he did acknowledge it. "What are you 6'4/6'5?" "I'm 6'4, what are you"? "I'm almost as tall as you" that was it there and then well I'm 6'4 but I'm not and with the angle when they greeted he was clearly taller. Now this here I'm not arguing at all. I'm not saying even that selleck was anymore than you said he was. He may only be 6'3.5-.75 like you said. because most here know Conan is shorter it's just they don't want to admit he isn't a true 6'4. You may be right with Tom selleck tho and that could mean Conan is in fact what I have him 6'3-6'3.25 as well as others here because he never looks a legit 6'4" guy ever. I'm curious to see how tall he would look without hair because next to the loads of 6'4s like hasselhoff and Selleck and haysbert neeson Lithgow he never looks as tall as them and with the latter he looked an entire inch under. The key with Conan that gives it away as I mentioned on his page multiple times is he always tries to induce people to add to their height whether on purpose or out of not knowing his true height. Selleck Neeson Haysbert he asked Wlad He said "6'6/6'7" then he said his own height once was 6'4-6'4.5 so I deduce all of that to be show heights that he uses to give people. I mean the average guess for selleck is 6'3.85 Conan 6'3.95 and selleck is taller
Rising force: he did acknowledge it. "What are you 6'4/6'5?" "I'm 6'4, what are you"? "I'm almost as tall as you" that was it there and then well I'm 6'4 but I'm not and with the angle when they greeted he was clearly taller. Now this here I'm not arguing at all. I'm not saying even that selleck was anymore than you said he was. He may only be 6'3.5-.75 like you said. because most here know Conan is shorter it's just they don't want to admit he isn't a true 6'4. You may be right with Tom selleck tho and that could mean Conan is in fact what I have him 6'3-6'3.25 as well as others here because he never looks a legit 6'4" guy ever. I'm curious to see how tall he would look without hair because next to the loads of 6'4s like hasselhoff and Selleck and haysbert neeson Lithgow he never looks as tall as them and with the latter he looked an entire inch under. The key with Conan that gives it away as I mentioned on his page multiple times is he always tries to induce people to add to their height whether on purpose or out of not knowing his true height. Selleck Neeson Haysbert he asked Wlad He said "6'6/6'7" then he said his own height once was 6'4-6'4.5 so I deduce all of that to be show heights that he uses to give people. I mean the average guess for selleck is 6'3.85 Conan 6'3.95 and selleck is taller
RisingForce said on 13/Jun/17
Canson, if you're saying I don't factor in camera angles with Barkley then you're not paying attention, but you should really keep these sorts of comments to the Barkley page. I have no desire for Barkley or anyone to be taller than they are. And yes, standing closer to the camera can make someone taller. It's common knowledge and I always mention factors like that or posture if it's necessary in the photo. Once again, your back to trying to find these contradictions in my posts that don't exist.
Back on topic, Conan didn't clearly acknowledge Selleck was taller in the interview either. He got cut off by Tom with the "I'm not" part. Conan may have been about to say that while he was tall like Tom, unlike Tom, he wasn't good looking, well built, broad shouldered, smooth with women etc. because that was the topic of the conversation and context it occurred in. I can't say for sure as I don't read minds, but it's not a clear cut admission from Conan that he's shorter. Basically, I think he could have been going on to saying that in his[Conan's] case, being 6'4" wasn't really an attribute like it was for Selleck because unlike Selleck, he was pale, lanky, awkward etc. However, if you want to read into things, you could possibly interpret Conan asking Tom if he was 6'4" or 6'5" that he thought Selleck might have been a bit taller, though Conan has claimed both 6'4" and 6'4.5" for himself so who knows for sure? His 6'4.5" claim may have been in shoes, though as I think there's a chance both men are/were 6'3.5" barefoot. Even if that's the case and both men were the same height, then with Selleck wearing thick boots for that interview that may have given him an advantage, Conan may have still thought Selleck was taller than himself. But unless I missed a part, I never heard Conan say "you're taller than me." Instead, he said to Tom "I'm about your height."
Incidentally, Tom was described in 1981 newspapers as "6-foot-5, 200 pound, hazel-eyed Tom Selleck."
Whether he he's closer to 6'3.5" or a legit 6'4", I'm sure he's been near 6'5" in footwear. And a legit 6'4" will get called 6'5" a lot. But if he's not 6'3.5" or 6'3.75" then I'd think if he really wanted to downgrade himself during the Magnum days, he'd have been more likely to say 6'3". I'm not sure he had a problem with his height either since he says during that same Conan interview that he felt like the little guy with his taller brothers.
Canson, if you're saying I don't factor in camera angles with Barkley then you're not paying attention, but you should really keep these sorts of comments to the Barkley page. I have no desire for Barkley or anyone to be taller than they are. And yes, standing closer to the camera can make someone taller. It's common knowledge and I always mention factors like that or posture if it's necessary in the photo. Once again, your back to trying to find these contradictions in my posts that don't exist.
Back on topic, Conan didn't clearly acknowledge Selleck was taller in the interview either. He got cut off by Tom with the "I'm not" part. Conan may have been about to say that while he was tall like Tom, unlike Tom, he wasn't good looking, well built, broad shouldered, smooth with women etc. because that was the topic of the conversation and context it occurred in. I can't say for sure as I don't read minds, but it's not a clear cut admission from Conan that he's shorter. Basically, I think he could have been going on to saying that in his[Conan's] case, being 6'4" wasn't really an attribute like it was for Selleck because unlike Selleck, he was pale, lanky, awkward etc. However, if you want to read into things, you could possibly interpret Conan asking Tom if he was 6'4" or 6'5" that he thought Selleck might have been a bit taller, though Conan has claimed both 6'4" and 6'4.5" for himself so who knows for sure? His 6'4.5" claim may have been in shoes, though as I think there's a chance both men are/were 6'3.5" barefoot. Even if that's the case and both men were the same height, then with Selleck wearing thick boots for that interview that may have given him an advantage, Conan may have still thought Selleck was taller than himself. But unless I missed a part, I never heard Conan say "you're taller than me." Instead, he said to Tom "I'm about your height."
Incidentally, Tom was described in 1981 newspapers as "6-foot-5, 200 pound, hazel-eyed Tom Selleck."
Whether he he's closer to 6'3.5" or a legit 6'4", I'm sure he's been near 6'5" in footwear. And a legit 6'4" will get called 6'5" a lot. But if he's not 6'3.5" or 6'3.75" then I'd think if he really wanted to downgrade himself during the Magnum days, he'd have been more likely to say 6'3". I'm not sure he had a problem with his height either since he says during that same Conan interview that he felt like the little guy with his taller brothers.
Johan said on 12/Jun/17
Nah no need for that, Selleck was a true 6'4" guy although not over while Conan is somewhere around 6'3.5" but with loads of hair.
He just is solidly built and so looks shorter than say a Hasselhoff today. Go back to his Magnum PI days when he was slim and he looks it.
Nah no need for that, Selleck was a true 6'4" guy although not over while Conan is somewhere around 6'3.5" but with loads of hair.
He just is solidly built and so looks shorter than say a Hasselhoff today. Go back to his Magnum PI days when he was slim and he looks it.
Canson said on 12/Jun/17
This validates that Conan isn't a true 6'4" if Selleck is under 6'4" peak and Conan acknowledged that Selleck is taller
This validates that Conan isn't a true 6'4" if Selleck is under 6'4" peak and Conan acknowledged that Selleck is taller
Christian-196.5cm (6ft5 3/8) said on 12/Jun/17
@Rampage(-_-_-)Clover
Agreed. Not a quite 6'4" peak.
@Rampage(-_-_-)Clover
Agreed. Not a quite 6'4" peak.
Canson said on 11/Jun/17
Rising force: Lewis is just as tall as Barkley is. Since you're using camera angle with chase and Selleck why is that not a factor in any of your Barkley comparisons here or on his page unless it's to make Barkley taller?
Rising force: Lewis is just as tall as Barkley is. Since you're using camera angle with chase and Selleck why is that not a factor in any of your Barkley comparisons here or on his page unless it's to make Barkley taller?
RisingForce said on 11/Jun/17
Adam, I think we have different definitions of side by side because if you look where their feet are or even their bodies, Selleck is standing noticeably in front of Chase. Like I said, I think even seeing how Selleck measures up to Tom Hanks brings into question how tall he could be standing there with that posture. Whether he's taller than Chase or not, I don't believe he'd be with a pronounced slouch like he has there. I think that's the camera advantage coming into play. An area we disagree is I believe if all we have isn't convincing then I think we have no choice but to take it with a grain of salt. If the 2 were equal distances from the camera in that picture then I'd at least say we could speculate about how much Selleck drops with his slouch, but how do you quantify height gained or lost from camera distance? As for the Selleck interview, the problem I see is that it's not as simple as Selleck looking down at Conan because Conan starts to bend forward as soon as he reaches out for a hand shake. I get that Selleck appears the bigger man, but it's a flawed comparison and technically, both men are looking down. Not just because of posture, but the position of the camera as well. It's behind Selleck while Conan is in front of Selleck. If you still don't understand what I'm referring to then I can try to demonstrate with a few stills. The video with Chase has a flaw as well in that it's quite brief where we see them with good posture, too brief to make any definitive conclusions. I only determined the two looked very close.
And I appreciate and agree with your last comment. This site wouldn't work, at least as a discussion site if you we all agreed.
Adam, I think we have different definitions of side by side because if you look where their feet are or even their bodies, Selleck is standing noticeably in front of Chase. Like I said, I think even seeing how Selleck measures up to Tom Hanks brings into question how tall he could be standing there with that posture. Whether he's taller than Chase or not, I don't believe he'd be with a pronounced slouch like he has there. I think that's the camera advantage coming into play. An area we disagree is I believe if all we have isn't convincing then I think we have no choice but to take it with a grain of salt. If the 2 were equal distances from the camera in that picture then I'd at least say we could speculate about how much Selleck drops with his slouch, but how do you quantify height gained or lost from camera distance? As for the Selleck interview, the problem I see is that it's not as simple as Selleck looking down at Conan because Conan starts to bend forward as soon as he reaches out for a hand shake. I get that Selleck appears the bigger man, but it's a flawed comparison and technically, both men are looking down. Not just because of posture, but the position of the camera as well. It's behind Selleck while Conan is in front of Selleck. If you still don't understand what I'm referring to then I can try to demonstrate with a few stills. The video with Chase has a flaw as well in that it's quite brief where we see them with good posture, too brief to make any definitive conclusions. I only determined the two looked very close.
And I appreciate and agree with your last comment. This site wouldn't work, at least as a discussion site if you we all agreed.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 11/Jun/17
I think 6ft3¾ peak could be on the money...
I think 6ft3¾ peak could be on the money...
Adam said on 11/Jun/17
RisingForce, unless we get these celebs to dump their shoes and have each pairing go back to back for the camera, we're going to have to rely on the best evidence. At least the picture below presents us with a clear line-up and the two stand right next to each other, a frozen snapshot of people posing in a stationary position for precisely that purpose. Many many less convincing pictures on this site are used to make judgments about relative heights and it is how it should be, because that is all we have. If you say that a video clip of two people meeting each other on stage presents better evidence, well then you would seem on the one hand to dismiss Selleck looking down to Conan (in a clip that would seem perhaps the best evidence of somebody who claims to be 6ft4 and who appears to convicingly edge Conan) but on the other hand holding up a less clear clip of Selleck and Chase meeting on stage as better evidence than a picture where they stand right next to each other, shoulder to shoulder. Off course one can make your own conclusions on the evidence presented to you, but if you have already made up your mind no pic is going to convince you. Having said all of of that, all these arguments are exactly what makes this site enjoyable. After all, we're only a half an inch at odds with each other and I certainly enjoy your perspectives also.
RisingForce, unless we get these celebs to dump their shoes and have each pairing go back to back for the camera, we're going to have to rely on the best evidence. At least the picture below presents us with a clear line-up and the two stand right next to each other, a frozen snapshot of people posing in a stationary position for precisely that purpose. Many many less convincing pictures on this site are used to make judgments about relative heights and it is how it should be, because that is all we have. If you say that a video clip of two people meeting each other on stage presents better evidence, well then you would seem on the one hand to dismiss Selleck looking down to Conan (in a clip that would seem perhaps the best evidence of somebody who claims to be 6ft4 and who appears to convicingly edge Conan) but on the other hand holding up a less clear clip of Selleck and Chase meeting on stage as better evidence than a picture where they stand right next to each other, shoulder to shoulder. Off course one can make your own conclusions on the evidence presented to you, but if you have already made up your mind no pic is going to convince you. Having said all of of that, all these arguments are exactly what makes this site enjoyable. After all, we're only a half an inch at odds with each other and I certainly enjoy your perspectives also.
RisingForce said on 10/Jun/17
Adam, Selleck is noticeably closer to the camera there. Look at Tom Hanks in that same photo. Hanks was never more than 6'0", but he's 2" max shorter there than Selleck in that same photo and Selleck is closer to the camera than Hanks as well. Hanks does have cowboy boots giving him potentially near 2 cm footwear advantage, but still, he'd have to look more than 3" taller than Hanks. Selleck does have more of a slouch, but Hanks isn't Busting a Gut himself and like I said, Selleck is closer to the camera. I wouldn't conclude based on that very same photo that Selleck is 4" taller than Hanks. Video is preferable to a still pic. It's at least as difficult to judge a difference of half an inch from a still photo, especially just one photo. In that particular photo, there's only a fraction difference, but we have to guess whether posture or distance from the camera is making a bigger difference - an impossible task. I believe Selleck was somewhere between 6'3.5" and 6'3.75" and Chase, I think was 6'3.5". I doubt there was more than a fraction difference if they weren't the same height.
Adam, Selleck is noticeably closer to the camera there. Look at Tom Hanks in that same photo. Hanks was never more than 6'0", but he's 2" max shorter there than Selleck in that same photo and Selleck is closer to the camera than Hanks as well. Hanks does have cowboy boots giving him potentially near 2 cm footwear advantage, but still, he'd have to look more than 3" taller than Hanks. Selleck does have more of a slouch, but Hanks isn't Busting a Gut himself and like I said, Selleck is closer to the camera. I wouldn't conclude based on that very same photo that Selleck is 4" taller than Hanks. Video is preferable to a still pic. It's at least as difficult to judge a difference of half an inch from a still photo, especially just one photo. In that particular photo, there's only a fraction difference, but we have to guess whether posture or distance from the camera is making a bigger difference - an impossible task. I believe Selleck was somewhere between 6'3.5" and 6'3.75" and Chase, I think was 6'3.5". I doubt there was more than a fraction difference if they weren't the same height.
Adam said on 10/Jun/17
@risingforce, there's no better comparison between Selleck and Chevy Chase than the still picture posted on 22 June 2016 below. It is impossible to judge a difference of 0,5" on a video clip. In the pic Chase stands right next to Selleck, very upright and straight. Selleck, an olympic sloucher, is still taller.
@risingforce, there's no better comparison between Selleck and Chevy Chase than the still picture posted on 22 June 2016 below. It is impossible to judge a difference of 0,5" on a video clip. In the pic Chase stands right next to Selleck, very upright and straight. Selleck, an olympic sloucher, is still taller.
RisingForce said on 9/Jun/17
Here's Selleck in 1993 on Chevy Chase's show: Click Here At about 3:39 Selleck greets Chevy. They look very close to me, Chevy looks taller when they first greet, then Selleck looks taller when they hug, probably changing as posture changes. Selleck's boots look like they could give him an advantage, but I think they're both legit 6'3.5" men who claimed that to be precise and rounded up to 6'4" at other times.
Here's Selleck in 1993 on Chevy Chase's show: Click Here At about 3:39 Selleck greets Chevy. They look very close to me, Chevy looks taller when they first greet, then Selleck looks taller when they hug, probably changing as posture changes. Selleck's boots look like they could give him an advantage, but I think they're both legit 6'3.5" men who claimed that to be precise and rounded up to 6'4" at other times.
RisingForce said on 5/Jun/17
Strahan is also visibly closer to the camera than Barkley + eyes and shoulders point to him being shorter. If we could guarantee Barkley was still at his peak, I'd take you up on the Butler bet seeing Barkley with Dr. J, Mullin and others. Lewis is simply not as tall as Barkley. He looks close to the same, but he's standing a step closer to the camera: Click Here Barkley is middle-aged now with a long history of back and knees that acted up a lot in Houston and Phoenix so I don't know how much he shrinks these days. Your disc get dehydrated much easier as you age. I saw 1/4" before 2000, Shawn Kemp was 6'8.75" in '89. As for Sprewell, all I remember thinking was legit 6'4". I was a foot away from him, but I can't tell the difference between a half inch in that situation. I buy either 6'4" or 6'4.5", but no less. As for Larry Johnson, I posted a full photo for you where he and Barkley are identical, we can see their feet and all. I see Barkley as no shorter than 6'5.5" compared to all the other guys I've seen him with, so take that for whatever time of day you like. I wouldn't estimate him shorter or taller than 6'5.5"-6'6". As for 6'4" estimates, we both know that's underestimating and helps prove my point. Barkley isn't 6'4", even you give him more than a half inch taller than that. As for comparing him in hypothetical height match ups we haven't seen, it's really all conjecture. I could say Barkley seems taller to me than Hulk Hogan who I've always pegged 6'5.5" peak, but without photo or video evidence, it doesn't mean much since it's just a subjective impression I got. I don't mean that as a criticism, I use the same examples at times, but at this point, I'm trying to maybe streamline our discussions a bit since we're on several pages with our main debate and sometimes I wind up spending a bit more time here than I intended. I do really believe Christian and Barkley would be about the same and I think you'd be quite surprised with Barkley's height. Barkley has made too many people between 6'1"-6'4" look small for me to believe anything below 6'5.5". But in some cases, when we don't agree on the reference points height we can only really agree to disagree because in some cases we might see the same height difference even. I see the shorter cases for Jordan and Kobe a lot better than I do Barkley.
Strahan is also visibly closer to the camera than Barkley + eyes and shoulders point to him being shorter. If we could guarantee Barkley was still at his peak, I'd take you up on the Butler bet seeing Barkley with Dr. J, Mullin and others. Lewis is simply not as tall as Barkley. He looks close to the same, but he's standing a step closer to the camera: Click Here Barkley is middle-aged now with a long history of back and knees that acted up a lot in Houston and Phoenix so I don't know how much he shrinks these days. Your disc get dehydrated much easier as you age. I saw 1/4" before 2000, Shawn Kemp was 6'8.75" in '89. As for Sprewell, all I remember thinking was legit 6'4". I was a foot away from him, but I can't tell the difference between a half inch in that situation. I buy either 6'4" or 6'4.5", but no less. As for Larry Johnson, I posted a full photo for you where he and Barkley are identical, we can see their feet and all. I see Barkley as no shorter than 6'5.5" compared to all the other guys I've seen him with, so take that for whatever time of day you like. I wouldn't estimate him shorter or taller than 6'5.5"-6'6". As for 6'4" estimates, we both know that's underestimating and helps prove my point. Barkley isn't 6'4", even you give him more than a half inch taller than that. As for comparing him in hypothetical height match ups we haven't seen, it's really all conjecture. I could say Barkley seems taller to me than Hulk Hogan who I've always pegged 6'5.5" peak, but without photo or video evidence, it doesn't mean much since it's just a subjective impression I got. I don't mean that as a criticism, I use the same examples at times, but at this point, I'm trying to maybe streamline our discussions a bit since we're on several pages with our main debate and sometimes I wind up spending a bit more time here than I intended. I do really believe Christian and Barkley would be about the same and I think you'd be quite surprised with Barkley's height. Barkley has made too many people between 6'1"-6'4" look small for me to believe anything below 6'5.5". But in some cases, when we don't agree on the reference points height we can only really agree to disagree because in some cases we might see the same height difference even. I see the shorter cases for Jordan and Kobe a lot better than I do Barkley.
Canson said on 31/May/17
@Rising Force: id edge strahan if the 6'4.25 is An earlier combine measurement. I'm usually just about 194 at a low 193.9. Strahan isn't an inch shorter than Barkley is. They're about the same height. I'm accounting for a severe lean and the fact he's further over and they come out almost identical. Barkley is also about identical with Lennox Lewis is and if you reverse their spots in the pic Lewis is taller than he is. I'd say Barkley has stragan by less than 1/2". Yes Barkley may or may not be taller than I am or may be exact. Don't know when he was measured but my guess is I wouldn't look up at him because it would not be noticeable if it's 1/4 or less. I will bet my life savings times 20 that Caron butler is taller than Barkley is. Butler is taller than Kobe and Jordan and Jamal crawford as well. The latter is the same as Kobe if you see their pic together (Crawford a pre draft is 6'4.5) and he looks no shorter than Jordan either). But he is shorter than butler. Butler (about 196) along with Carmelo Anthony (198-199) Jarrett jack (188-189) Keith bogans (193-194) are some of the few where their draft measurements are very near their real normal walking heights meaning afternoon levels. Larry Johnson also looked while maybe not 197cm in person (probably was rounded up a bit) he did look 6'5 and change when I met him and identical with another friend who is christians size (196.2 at his lowest). He also has met him and in the pic they are identical. I'd put LJ closer to 6'5 (under 1/2) than to 6'6". He didn't look nearly the size of Abraham Benrubi or Carmelo Anthony or Stacey augmon in person (all of whom are 198/199 in person). You have to also take into account as you mentioned about sprewell once being 6'4.5 pre draft that there were nothing but 1/2" or full inch increments prior to maybe 2000 I think. Sprewell was early 90s so a 6'4 1/8 could be 6'4.5 on paper as they don't typically round down and sprewell admitted himself he's 6'4" which is how my former coach who's a scout said spree is 6'4" when he met him.
If you see willie mcginest when Barkley visited the locker room of the pats they're close in height actually about identical and mcginest is a listed 6'5" on the roster to where bill belichick said Charles is 6'4". Belichick has his own 6'4" solid qb to gauge that off of. I'd say Barkley is taller than Brady but not by an inch more half. And no a 6'5 at his lowest even if he is that tall isn't 6'5.5 midday. Guys this size or that size lose 1/2" in as little as 2. I'm usually 2-2.25 hours to get down to 6'4 5/8. You've heard Christian say before that he's 196.5 after 5 hours maybe 196.6 and that's him being over 198 out of bed. If Barkley is 6'5" at his lowest (we aren't talking an absolute low of course) that would make him 196cm midday. jist for record I myself am 195.8 out of bed and am 194.1 usually tops after 5 hours if I just do normal tasks and have even seen 194 flat after 5. I am 193.9 at night so that's a .2cm difference (if I don't hit the gym) meaning his midday would be maybe 195.7-.8 is he's a solid 6'5" evening. Typically a guy 6'0" or over loses 1/2" out of bed in 2-3 hours and Christian is legitimately taller than Barkley is regardless of our differing belief (you saying he's 6'5.5 me saying 6'4 5/8). Christian loses a good half inch in about 3 hours or so (he doesn't lose it as quickly as I do or as Ali Baba who is a legit 6'6"). Btw Barkley looks nowhere near as tall as Ali baba does.
@Rising Force: id edge strahan if the 6'4.25 is An earlier combine measurement. I'm usually just about 194 at a low 193.9. Strahan isn't an inch shorter than Barkley is. They're about the same height. I'm accounting for a severe lean and the fact he's further over and they come out almost identical. Barkley is also about identical with Lennox Lewis is and if you reverse their spots in the pic Lewis is taller than he is. I'd say Barkley has stragan by less than 1/2". Yes Barkley may or may not be taller than I am or may be exact. Don't know when he was measured but my guess is I wouldn't look up at him because it would not be noticeable if it's 1/4 or less. I will bet my life savings times 20 that Caron butler is taller than Barkley is. Butler is taller than Kobe and Jordan and Jamal crawford as well. The latter is the same as Kobe if you see their pic together (Crawford a pre draft is 6'4.5) and he looks no shorter than Jordan either). But he is shorter than butler. Butler (about 196) along with Carmelo Anthony (198-199) Jarrett jack (188-189) Keith bogans (193-194) are some of the few where their draft measurements are very near their real normal walking heights meaning afternoon levels. Larry Johnson also looked while maybe not 197cm in person (probably was rounded up a bit) he did look 6'5 and change when I met him and identical with another friend who is christians size (196.2 at his lowest). He also has met him and in the pic they are identical. I'd put LJ closer to 6'5 (under 1/2) than to 6'6". He didn't look nearly the size of Abraham Benrubi or Carmelo Anthony or Stacey augmon in person (all of whom are 198/199 in person). You have to also take into account as you mentioned about sprewell once being 6'4.5 pre draft that there were nothing but 1/2" or full inch increments prior to maybe 2000 I think. Sprewell was early 90s so a 6'4 1/8 could be 6'4.5 on paper as they don't typically round down and sprewell admitted himself he's 6'4" which is how my former coach who's a scout said spree is 6'4" when he met him.
If you see willie mcginest when Barkley visited the locker room of the pats they're close in height actually about identical and mcginest is a listed 6'5" on the roster to where bill belichick said Charles is 6'4". Belichick has his own 6'4" solid qb to gauge that off of. I'd say Barkley is taller than Brady but not by an inch more half. And no a 6'5 at his lowest even if he is that tall isn't 6'5.5 midday. Guys this size or that size lose 1/2" in as little as 2. I'm usually 2-2.25 hours to get down to 6'4 5/8. You've heard Christian say before that he's 196.5 after 5 hours maybe 196.6 and that's him being over 198 out of bed. If Barkley is 6'5" at his lowest (we aren't talking an absolute low of course) that would make him 196cm midday. jist for record I myself am 195.8 out of bed and am 194.1 usually tops after 5 hours if I just do normal tasks and have even seen 194 flat after 5. I am 193.9 at night so that's a .2cm difference (if I don't hit the gym) meaning his midday would be maybe 195.7-.8 is he's a solid 6'5" evening. Typically a guy 6'0" or over loses 1/2" out of bed in 2-3 hours and Christian is legitimately taller than Barkley is regardless of our differing belief (you saying he's 6'5.5 me saying 6'4 5/8). Christian loses a good half inch in about 3 hours or so (he doesn't lose it as quickly as I do or as Ali Baba who is a legit 6'6"). Btw Barkley looks nowhere near as tall as Ali baba does.
RichardSpain said on 16/May/17
Classic man 192cm
Nowadays looks 190cm. He has good genetics seems young.
Classic man 192cm
Nowadays looks 190cm. He has good genetics seems young.
HeightMan said on 15/May/17
From my Magnum binge watching: Surely between 192 - 193cm. But not taller!
From my Magnum binge watching: Surely between 192 - 193cm. But not taller!
RisingForce said on 14/May/17
Key word is IF. That's mentioned in one sports illustrated article and it doesn't even say he measured it. It merely says, "the world learned" Barkley was "more like" 6-4 5/8. It doesn't say how they learned that, or that he was exactly that. But it's just inconsistent for you to insist this occurred and is somehow credible while consistently questioning or disregarding a widely reported 6'3.75" pre-draft measurement for Dwyane Wade, and also knocking 1/2" off Scottie Pippen's 6'7.5" 1987 measurement, though even Pippen at a flat 6'7" would still make Barkley look 6'5"-6'5.5" in comparison. I'd bet Barkley, assuming he hasn't lost height, would still clear 6'5" at his low and give him a midday measurement and I'd put down money on 6'5.5". You're about the same height as Michael Strahan, right? Well, check Strahan with Barkley, he's a good inch shorter.
Key word is IF. That's mentioned in one sports illustrated article and it doesn't even say he measured it. It merely says, "the world learned" Barkley was "more like" 6-4 5/8. It doesn't say how they learned that, or that he was exactly that. But it's just inconsistent for you to insist this occurred and is somehow credible while consistently questioning or disregarding a widely reported 6'3.75" pre-draft measurement for Dwyane Wade, and also knocking 1/2" off Scottie Pippen's 6'7.5" 1987 measurement, though even Pippen at a flat 6'7" would still make Barkley look 6'5"-6'5.5" in comparison. I'd bet Barkley, assuming he hasn't lost height, would still clear 6'5" at his low and give him a midday measurement and I'd put down money on 6'5.5". You're about the same height as Michael Strahan, right? Well, check Strahan with Barkley, he's a good inch shorter.
Canson said on 14/May/17
@Rising Force: from all of the evidence I've seen knowing two people who have met him along with the posts on his page from the likes of Arby etc I think it's safe to say I wouldn't be looking up much if at all. The most he is is 195cm and that's definitely not his lowest if he measured 6'4 5/8 at the olympics
@Rising Force: from all of the evidence I've seen knowing two people who have met him along with the posts on his page from the likes of Arby etc I think it's safe to say I wouldn't be looking up much if at all. The most he is is 195cm and that's definitely not his lowest if he measured 6'4 5/8 at the olympics
RisingForce said on 12/May/17
It doesn't matter since neither of us have met Barkley, but I think you'll be in for quite a surprise if you ever do meet him and looking up more than 1/2"! As a long time NBA fan, I know what that height looks like on an NBA court, which is most of who I'm comparing Barkley to and sometimes using heights we agree on for reference. Let me put it this way, if we come to someone like Jean-Claude Van Damme for instance, it wouldn't be a valid argument for me to say that because I'm 5'8"-5'9" range, I therefor know what that height looks like and you at 6'4" would struggle with it. Ultimately, we both have to prove our points showing the person in question standing next to others of a fairly well known height. Btw, Butler might very well be taller than Kobe(I've told you, I'm less certain on Kobe than Barkley), but not in every pic: Click Here
It doesn't matter since neither of us have met Barkley, but I think you'll be in for quite a surprise if you ever do meet him and looking up more than 1/2"! As a long time NBA fan, I know what that height looks like on an NBA court, which is most of who I'm comparing Barkley to and sometimes using heights we agree on for reference. Let me put it this way, if we come to someone like Jean-Claude Van Damme for instance, it wouldn't be a valid argument for me to say that because I'm 5'8"-5'9" range, I therefor know what that height looks like and you at 6'4" would struggle with it. Ultimately, we both have to prove our points showing the person in question standing next to others of a fairly well known height. Btw, Butler might very well be taller than Kobe(I've told you, I'm less certain on Kobe than Barkley), but not in every pic: Click Here
Adam said on 10/May/17
And from producer Donald Bellisario in the Chicago Tribune about David James Elliott "playing down" to shorter actors : "I used to have the same problem with Selleck.....who stands 6ft4. The producer then demonstrated the typical Selleck stance - legs apart, knees slightly bent - which made him look several inches shorter."
And from producer Donald Bellisario in the Chicago Tribune about David James Elliott "playing down" to shorter actors : "I used to have the same problem with Selleck.....who stands 6ft4. The producer then demonstrated the typical Selleck stance - legs apart, knees slightly bent - which made him look several inches shorter."
Adam said on 10/May/17
I also found this quote in a 2003 TV Guide edition : " A lofty 6'4", he was known to downplay his height by an inch to accommodate those shorter than him."
I also found this quote in a 2003 TV Guide edition : " A lofty 6'4", he was known to downplay his height by an inch to accommodate those shorter than him."
Canson said on 9/May/17
@Rising Force: well I myself am that height 6'4" and change. I can also tell what a legit 6'4" looks like. Meaning a guy like Hoff or Neeson etc (for the latter I mean rob has him listed at 6'4.25 that's hardly a diff from 6'4). I can look at Barkley Jordan and Kobe and say they are all similar (within many 1/2" of me). Now as far as your cousin not undermining what you are saying but I've heard a lot of 6'2 1/2 guys claim their shoes and say 6'4" or 6'4 out of bed guys that are 6'3 at night which is why they make 6'4" looks small. Also has to do with proportions. But all I can say is I have met Caron butler in person before (played against him as well(. He's 196cm in person and is clearly taller than Kobe is in pics and would also edge out Barkley and Jordan the same or more
@Rising Force: well I myself am that height 6'4" and change. I can also tell what a legit 6'4" looks like. Meaning a guy like Hoff or Neeson etc (for the latter I mean rob has him listed at 6'4.25 that's hardly a diff from 6'4). I can look at Barkley Jordan and Kobe and say they are all similar (within many 1/2" of me). Now as far as your cousin not undermining what you are saying but I've heard a lot of 6'2 1/2 guys claim their shoes and say 6'4" or 6'4 out of bed guys that are 6'3 at night which is why they make 6'4" looks small. Also has to do with proportions. But all I can say is I have met Caron butler in person before (played against him as well(. He's 196cm in person and is clearly taller than Kobe is in pics and would also edge out Barkley and Jordan the same or more
RisingForce said on 9/May/17
Canson, I'm not saying it's often, only that it happens, which is all that's relevant since I don't claim many do this. You could probably count on one hand the people on this site I argue downplay their height. I'm aware of tall men inflating their heights as well and even wearing elevator boots to try to sell the inflation such as Kane Hodder. My point being, there are exceptions to every rule. A lot of people's perspective is screwed up to begin with because outside of people like us who have an interest in height, many are wildly inaccurate with their height by 2 or more inches. My own height is irrelevant to what we're debating because we're not talking about people I've met in person, but rather people we're comparing to some other frame of reference. Incidentally, while not ideal, I do have a decent enough idea of what a legit 6'4" looks like because for one example, my cousin is about that height.
Canson, I'm not saying it's often, only that it happens, which is all that's relevant since I don't claim many do this. You could probably count on one hand the people on this site I argue downplay their height. I'm aware of tall men inflating their heights as well and even wearing elevator boots to try to sell the inflation such as Kane Hodder. My point being, there are exceptions to every rule. A lot of people's perspective is screwed up to begin with because outside of people like us who have an interest in height, many are wildly inaccurate with their height by 2 or more inches. My own height is irrelevant to what we're debating because we're not talking about people I've met in person, but rather people we're comparing to some other frame of reference. Incidentally, while not ideal, I do have a decent enough idea of what a legit 6'4" looks like because for one example, my cousin is about that height.
Canson said on 1/May/17
@Rising Force: I'm sure some do but come on that's a load people feed you. Most men don't downplay their height in reality. If you aren't a certain height like 6'0" you won't know either how tall a legit 6'4 should look. What I'm saying is you could be maybe 5'8" and have a 6'2 1/2 guy say he's 6'4" and you'd believe him when in reality he isn't. So less that guys downplay more that guys lie up and screw up the perspective
@Rising Force: I'm sure some do but come on that's a load people feed you. Most men don't downplay their height in reality. If you aren't a certain height like 6'0" you won't know either how tall a legit 6'4 should look. What I'm saying is you could be maybe 5'8" and have a 6'2 1/2 guy say he's 6'4" and you'd believe him when in reality he isn't. So less that guys downplay more that guys lie up and screw up the perspective
RisingForce said on 29/Apr/17
Canson, it's far from just Conan that makes people believe Kobe and especially Barkley are taller than they are, I haven't mentioned that comparison in my case for either and very tall men sometimes do downplay their height, but that's another story. In fact, if it never happened, Rob would have listed Selleck 6'3.5" peak already since he claimed it twice in the 80s and that's how tall I believe Selleck was. As for Conan, I'll check his page to see if I see compelling evidence Conan is less than 6'4". I haven't posted there much.
Canson, it's far from just Conan that makes people believe Kobe and especially Barkley are taller than they are, I haven't mentioned that comparison in my case for either and very tall men sometimes do downplay their height, but that's another story. In fact, if it never happened, Rob would have listed Selleck 6'3.5" peak already since he claimed it twice in the 80s and that's how tall I believe Selleck was. As for Conan, I'll check his page to see if I see compelling evidence Conan is less than 6'4". I haven't posted there much.
Canson said on 26/Apr/17
@Rising Force: Conan never was as tall as Hasselboff or Haysbert or Selleck or Lithgow. And people underestimate how much difference there was with them. Like Christian also said on conans page 191. That's why people assume people like Kobe and Barkley are taller than they are becauSe of how they appear next to someone like him. And people don't want to downgrade instead they upgrade which to me is even more insulting especially after someone has already claimed like Barkley and Kobe both have
@Rising Force: Conan never was as tall as Hasselboff or Haysbert or Selleck or Lithgow. And people underestimate how much difference there was with them. Like Christian also said on conans page 191. That's why people assume people like Kobe and Barkley are taller than they are becauSe of how they appear next to someone like him. And people don't want to downgrade instead they upgrade which to me is even more insulting especially after someone has already claimed like Barkley and Kobe both have
RisingForce said on 25/Apr/17
Well, Canson, I'll have to watch Selleck with Conan, though I've personally never doubted Conan was 6'4". But a young Selleck didn't look anywhere near as tall as he should have with 5'10" Patrick Swayze: Click Here Click Here Certainly Swayze has better posture and camera advantage, but you'd have expected Selleck to tower Swayze. Selleck looks 3 inches taller in the 1st pic, though his slouch should lose at least an inch compared to Swayze's perfect posture so a subtle camera advantage and Swayze's footwear has to account for the other 1.5". I'm not suggesting he's less than 6'3.5" either, that's just a strange photo. He must have had 6'2.5" Ted Danson by about an inch: Click Here Click Here I take him at his word that he was 6'3.5" peak, which will indeed look towering, but looking at the above photo with 177 cm Bridget Moynahan in heels, it wouldn't surprise me if he's no more than 190 cm today.
Well, Canson, I'll have to watch Selleck with Conan, though I've personally never doubted Conan was 6'4". But a young Selleck didn't look anywhere near as tall as he should have with 5'10" Patrick Swayze: Click Here Click Here Certainly Swayze has better posture and camera advantage, but you'd have expected Selleck to tower Swayze. Selleck looks 3 inches taller in the 1st pic, though his slouch should lose at least an inch compared to Swayze's perfect posture so a subtle camera advantage and Swayze's footwear has to account for the other 1.5". I'm not suggesting he's less than 6'3.5" either, that's just a strange photo. He must have had 6'2.5" Ted Danson by about an inch: Click Here Click Here I take him at his word that he was 6'3.5" peak, which will indeed look towering, but looking at the above photo with 177 cm Bridget Moynahan in heels, it wouldn't surprise me if he's no more than 190 cm today.
Thomas Veil said on 20/Apr/17
He's around 6'2 now. In his heyday for sure a solid 6'4 maybe even more.
He's around 6'2 now. In his heyday for sure a solid 6'4 maybe even more.
Canson said on 15/Apr/17
@Adam: there's always a chance for Selleck like most 6'4" guys that he dipped to 192.5-192.8. That wouldn't be all that noticeable either unless you put a legit 6'4" at the lowest or a strong 6'4" up next to him
@Adam: there's always a chance for Selleck like most 6'4" guys that he dipped to 192.5-192.8. That wouldn't be all that noticeable either unless you put a legit 6'4" at the lowest or a strong 6'4" up next to him
Adam said on 14/Apr/17
For me the pic with Frank Bruno is telling (24 Aug 16 below). In Bruno's book where the picture appears Bruno himself describes Selleck as "the 6ft6 actor". Off course that is an exaggeration but if you look at the pic with Bruno, Selleck could not have been anything less than 6ft4 if Bruno was a legit 6ft3. The same is true of the pic with Chevy Chase. If Chevy was 6ft3,5 in his prime, Selleck must have been a legit 6ft4.
For me the pic with Frank Bruno is telling (24 Aug 16 below). In Bruno's book where the picture appears Bruno himself describes Selleck as "the 6ft6 actor". Off course that is an exaggeration but if you look at the pic with Bruno, Selleck could not have been anything less than 6ft4 if Bruno was a legit 6ft3. The same is true of the pic with Chevy Chase. If Chevy was 6ft3,5 in his prime, Selleck must have been a legit 6ft4.
shiva 181 cms said on 12/Apr/17
Tom Brady pulled of looking at least an inch taller with Bridget than Tom selleck today so no more than 6'3.25 today ,peak was 6'4
Tom Brady pulled of looking at least an inch taller with Bridget than Tom selleck today so no more than 6'3.25 today ,peak was 6'4
Canson said on 5/Apr/17
@Rising Force: that's bad news for Conan lol. He was shorter than Selleck. I always had Conan as 6'3-6'3.25 peak and Selleck may have been the full 6'4" or 6'3.75 peak
@Rising Force: that's bad news for Conan lol. He was shorter than Selleck. I always had Conan as 6'3-6'3.25 peak and Selleck may have been the full 6'4" or 6'3.75 peak
S.J.H said on 3/Apr/17
Selleck have already down to 6'3-6'3.25 since few years back
Selleck have already down to 6'3-6'3.25 since few years back
RisingForce said on 21/Mar/17
That makes sense. Unfortunate for me since it made it so much easier to search, but I can't fault anyone for trying to make money off something people demand. I do at least wish they'd still turn up the article in the search results so you'd know of its existence and give you the option of paying to view the article.
That makes sense. Unfortunate for me since it made it so much easier to search, but I can't fault anyone for trying to make money off something people demand. I do at least wish they'd still turn up the article in the search results so you'd know of its existence and give you the option of paying to view the article.
RisingForce said on 20/Mar/17
He claimed 6'3.5" twice in the 80's. In a 1987 interview with the Houston Chronicle Tom said he was "about 6-foot-3 1/2"
Unfortunately, the link is dead. He can look more 190 cm today, but maybe it's posture. The "about" leaves open the possibility he was more like 6'3 5/8" if he want to get super precise. Or possibly a 6'3.75" midday and 6'3.5" evening guy.
He claimed 6'3.5" twice in the 80's. In a 1987 interview with the Houston Chronicle Tom said he was "about 6-foot-3 1/2"
Unfortunately, the link is dead. He can look more 190 cm today, but maybe it's posture. The "about" leaves open the possibility he was more like 6'3 5/8" if he want to get super precise. Or possibly a 6'3.75" midday and 6'3.5" evening guy.
RisingForce said on 20/Mar/17
I can't find the quote right now since Google book and archive search is nowhere near as good as it use to be, but the TV Guide issue had to have been December 27, 1980-January 2, 1981, Volume 28, No. 52, Issue #1448)
Editor Rob
I can't find the quote right now since Google book and archive search is nowhere near as good as it use to be, but the TV Guide issue had to have been December 27, 1980-January 2, 1981, Volume 28, No. 52, Issue #1448)
Editor Rob I have seen it myself years ago, the search facility did get worse, well not so much worse as many papers want money for archive searching.
S.J.H said on 9/Mar/17
I don't think tom selleck was solid 6'4 than jeff goldblum. He might be 6'3.75 peak and 6'3.25 now. Peak selleck is taller than conan o'brien who was more like 6'3.25 peak and claim 6'4
I don't think tom selleck was solid 6'4 than jeff goldblum. He might be 6'3.75 peak and 6'3.25 now. Peak selleck is taller than conan o'brien who was more like 6'3.25 peak and claim 6'4
RisingForce said on 8/Mar/17
Yeah, I have to find the quote again and check the exact year, but it was after Magnum started and long after he had gotten the role of Lance on the Rockford Files. Is there anything out there that suggests Selleck was uncomfortable with his height beyond merely the possibility of losing supporting roles? If that was the case, I'd expect him to take off a full inch like Rock Hudson sometimes did. A legit 6'3.5" is really tall and towers over most similar to how a 6'4" man will. I bet there'd be virtually no difference between Selleck, Clint Eastwood and John Wayne at their peaks.
Yeah, I have to find the quote again and check the exact year, but it was after Magnum started and long after he had gotten the role of Lance on the Rockford Files. Is there anything out there that suggests Selleck was uncomfortable with his height beyond merely the possibility of losing supporting roles? If that was the case, I'd expect him to take off a full inch like Rock Hudson sometimes did. A legit 6'3.5" is really tall and towers over most similar to how a 6'4" man will. I bet there'd be virtually no difference between Selleck, Clint Eastwood and John Wayne at their peaks.
RisingForce said on 7/Mar/17
6'3.5" was his peak height. He claimed it in a TV Guide interview from around 1981. He has no reason to lie. Probably down to 6'3" flat today.
Editor Rob
6'3.5" was his peak height. He claimed it in a TV Guide interview from around 1981. He has no reason to lie. Probably down to 6'3" flat today.
Editor Rob RisingForce, it could have been that he didn't want to claim 6ft 4 and used the 3.5...but that would make more sense at the start of a career, by early 80's he was already very famous and saying 6ft 4 wouldn't have been an issue.
Canson said on 5/Mar/17
I agree with christian. Maybe he's 6'3.25 today tops but I can see just about a solid 6'4 maybe 6'3.75 peak. He looks 2" shorter than peter hermann does. But the question now becomes if he is taller than Conan as is Hasselhoff and Lithgow why hasn't Conan been downgraded yet? He has never been 6'4 he's a legit 6'3 guy
I agree with christian. Maybe he's 6'3.25 today tops but I can see just about a solid 6'4 maybe 6'3.75 peak. He looks 2" shorter than peter hermann does. But the question now becomes if he is taller than Conan as is Hasselhoff and Lithgow why hasn't Conan been downgraded yet? He has never been 6'4 he's a legit 6'3 guy
Canson said on 5/Mar/17
I agree with christian. Maybe he's 6'3.25 today tops but I can see just about a solid 6'4 maybe 6'3.75 peak. He looks 2" shorter than peter hermann does
I agree with christian. Maybe he's 6'3.25 today tops but I can see just about a solid 6'4 maybe 6'3.75 peak. He looks 2" shorter than peter hermann does
Adam said on 26/Feb/17
The pictures of Selleck with his father and brothers are interesting. His brothers must be 6ft7 and his father 6ft5. He could never have grown up being aware of his height, exactly the opposite actually. His posture in most pics also suggestes that. He doesn't even think he is tall and he doesn't try to stretch himself to make the point.
The pictures of Selleck with his father and brothers are interesting. His brothers must be 6ft7 and his father 6ft5. He could never have grown up being aware of his height, exactly the opposite actually. His posture in most pics also suggestes that. He doesn't even think he is tall and he doesn't try to stretch himself to make the point.
Allie said on 2/Feb/17
Looked really tall in Friends.
Looked really tall in Friends.
Adam said on 31/Jan/17
Just for fun, who is taller : Knight Rider standing here with TC, or Magnum standing with TC?
Click Here
In the picture with Selleck Mosley wears a cap. Does the cap perhaps add a centimeter or so to the top of his head?
Just for fun, who is taller : Knight Rider standing here with TC, or Magnum standing with TC?
Click Here
In the picture with Selleck Mosley wears a cap. Does the cap perhaps add a centimeter or so to the top of his head?
Adam said on 23/Jan/17
I read an interesting piece in an old magazine where Selleck mentions that in his earlier career he downplayed his height for character interviews. Will try and find it.
I read an interesting piece in an old magazine where Selleck mentions that in his earlier career he downplayed his height for character interviews. Will try and find it.
heelshealheight said on 17/Jan/17
Yes, genuinely tall man, and he hasn't lost much height with age. Seems to be about the same height with Conan o'Brien and David Hasselhoff.
Yes, genuinely tall man, and he hasn't lost much height with age. Seems to be about the same height with Conan o'Brien and David Hasselhoff.
Keithg said on 8/Jan/17
Looked rather tall in magnum
Looked rather tall in magnum
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 5/Jan/17
I'd guess 6ft3 today
I'd guess 6ft3 today
Christian-196.2cm (6ft5.25) said on 23/Dec/16
"Tom Selleck's Height is 6ft 3in (190.5 cm)"
"Peak Height was 6ft 3.75in (192.4 cm)"
I think his current height especially needs to be downgraded Rob. He doesn't look much over 6ft3 nowadays, if any.
"Tom Selleck's Height is 6ft 3in (190.5 cm)"
"Peak Height was 6ft 3.75in (192.4 cm)"
I think his current height especially needs to be downgraded Rob. He doesn't look much over 6ft3 nowadays, if any.
FRANK said on 9/Dec/16
Probably around 6´4" or 192-193 cms in his peak and almost 6´3" or 190 cms now
Probably around 6´4" or 192-193 cms in his peak and almost 6´3" or 190 cms now
Lance said on 5/Dec/16
I was in the gym at Valley College where he played Volleyball before going to USC. His height there was listed at 6'7". Keep in mind that sports teams sometimes are generous with their stats. I played football at 5'10" and 165 but when I saw the football program, I was listed at 6'0" and 175.
I was in the gym at Valley College where he played Volleyball before going to USC. His height there was listed at 6'7". Keep in mind that sports teams sometimes are generous with their stats. I played football at 5'10" and 165 but when I saw the football program, I was listed at 6'0" and 175.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 4/Dec/16
Rob, could he be dipping a bit under 6ft3 now?
Editor Rob
Rob, could he be dipping a bit under 6ft3 now?
Editor Rob Rampage, I think with some guys his age, he could be looking a weak 6ft 3 at times, but when you measure him, he could still be 6ft 3 range.
newbie said on 28/Nov/16
Considering the number of photos of him with guys in the 6'2-6'4 range and he measures up as you'd expect for a genuine 6'4 in those photos, plus he was never one for big footwear, I don't see any reason to doubt he was a genuine 6'4, that may be flat and others like Neeson may be 6'4 and a bit over but that doesn't change Selleck's height.
Considering the number of photos of him with guys in the 6'2-6'4 range and he measures up as you'd expect for a genuine 6'4 in those photos, plus he was never one for big footwear, I don't see any reason to doubt he was a genuine 6'4, that may be flat and others like Neeson may be 6'4 and a bit over but that doesn't change Selleck's height.
Booker said on 12/Nov/16
190-192 cm range
190-192 cm range
berta said on 24/Oct/16
in my eyes tom selleck was a big 193 guy peak looked taller than conan o brien and looked atleast 193 with ted danson who i tihnk was more 190 than 189. i think he was 193,5 peak and even today he look 192
in my eyes tom selleck was a big 193 guy peak looked taller than conan o brien and looked atleast 193 with ted danson who i tihnk was more 190 than 189. i think he was 193,5 peak and even today he look 192
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 12/Oct/16
Arch, I think his height is only noticeable when he's standing with guys in the 6ft to 6ft2 range. In Three Men and A Baby he didn't look particularly towering...But then there are scenes in Magnum where he's on the beach and his height is the first thing I notice. He's a good head above everyone ...almost like Hasselhoff was on Baywatch. 6ft4 is fine for his peak but he more likely scraped it at best rather than cleared it. His posture wasn't great though
Arch, I think his height is only noticeable when he's standing with guys in the 6ft to 6ft2 range. In Three Men and A Baby he didn't look particularly towering...But then there are scenes in Magnum where he's on the beach and his height is the first thing I notice. He's a good head above everyone ...almost like Hasselhoff was on Baywatch. 6ft4 is fine for his peak but he more likely scraped it at best rather than cleared it. His posture wasn't great though
Adam said on 12/Oct/16
Josh, the problem with Selleck is his posture. In that picture with Chevy (who stands very straight) Selleck almost looks as if he is trying to hide his true height. No doubt his edge over Chevy Chase would be even more noticeable if he had stood straighter.
Josh, the problem with Selleck is his posture. In that picture with Chevy (who stands very straight) Selleck almost looks as if he is trying to hide his true height. No doubt his edge over Chevy Chase would be even more noticeable if he had stood straighter.
Arch Stanton said on 11/Oct/16
It is kind of obvious when you look into it, the above photo for instance still noticeably taller than a 5 ft 10 lady in big heels, but hide her in the photo and look at him, you'd not guess him as high as 6'4 standing by himself!!
It is kind of obvious when you look into it, the above photo for instance still noticeably taller than a 5 ft 10 lady in big heels, but hide her in the photo and look at him, you'd not guess him as high as 6'4 standing by himself!!
Arch Stanton said on 11/Oct/16
Selleck is a guy though who on film often doesn't look as big as this. If I didn't know his height I'd have thought about 6'2 in picturing, not a big 6'4. I suppose like Clint Eastwood peak he has that look where he's often not stand out tall on screen but taller than you think.Like Andrea often says there seems to be a lot of variation in how tall a 6'4 guy can really look. Might be his build, I don't know. but guys like Seagal and peak Goldblum for some reason I'd think of as 1-2 inches than somebody like Selleck, but when you look into it he's definitely around this barefoot with Schwimmer in Friends.
Selleck is a guy though who on film often doesn't look as big as this. If I didn't know his height I'd have thought about 6'2 in picturing, not a big 6'4. I suppose like Clint Eastwood peak he has that look where he's often not stand out tall on screen but taller than you think.Like Andrea often says there seems to be a lot of variation in how tall a 6'4 guy can really look. Might be his build, I don't know. but guys like Seagal and peak Goldblum for some reason I'd think of as 1-2 inches than somebody like Selleck, but when you look into it he's definitely around this barefoot with Schwimmer in Friends.
josh jeffords said on 10/Oct/16
Tom has looked 6 4 back in the day like 70s or 80s but he usually doesnt even look 6 3 anymore.
It may be proportions unlike most freakishly tall guys tom still has a normal build even above average.
He does tower over 6ft guys even guys who say they are 6 1 barely had the edge on chevy so 6 3 .75 rounded up sounds right.
He was noticeably taller than sam elliot assuming he was 6 2 back then and most every other late 70 western guy.
As for the Clint Walker argument Id say he was much bigger in his prime heavy build and made most folks look like kids.
Clint looked over 6 6 on tv in boots well into the 70s Tom never looked much over 6 4 on tv.
Tom has looked 6 4 back in the day like 70s or 80s but he usually doesnt even look 6 3 anymore.
It may be proportions unlike most freakishly tall guys tom still has a normal build even above average.
He does tower over 6ft guys even guys who say they are 6 1 barely had the edge on chevy so 6 3 .75 rounded up sounds right.
He was noticeably taller than sam elliot assuming he was 6 2 back then and most every other late 70 western guy.
As for the Clint Walker argument Id say he was much bigger in his prime heavy build and made most folks look like kids.
Clint looked over 6 6 on tv in boots well into the 70s Tom never looked much over 6 4 on tv.
Arch Stanton said on 4/Oct/16
Clint Walker will be 90 next year, of course he's lost 2-3 inches!!! Still super tall for nearly 90! How often do you see a 90 year old guy that tall?
Clint Walker will be 90 next year, of course he's lost 2-3 inches!!! Still super tall for nearly 90! How often do you see a 90 year old guy that tall?
Streichs said on 20/Sep/16
This is Selleck with Conan. In this interview Conan asks Selleck if he is 6ft4 or 6ft5. If you look at the screenshot maybe Conan had good reason to estimate Selleck at 6ft5.
Click Here
This is Selleck with Conan. In this interview Conan asks Selleck if he is 6ft4 or 6ft5. If you look at the screenshot maybe Conan had good reason to estimate Selleck at 6ft5.
Click Here
Adam said on 19/Sep/16
Rampage, even at his age Walker absolutely towers over everybody else in that picture, Selleck excluded. He is still very very tall. And even if you allow three inches lost over the years, Walker's footwear gives him a big advantage over Selleck, perhaps an inch. So, three inches lost through age (if that is really the case) and one inch gained in footwear Selleck, who looks to be right at Walker's height in that picture, stands at 6ft4 at least.
Rampage, even at his age Walker absolutely towers over everybody else in that picture, Selleck excluded. He is still very very tall. And even if you allow three inches lost over the years, Walker's footwear gives him a big advantage over Selleck, perhaps an inch. So, three inches lost through age (if that is really the case) and one inch gained in footwear Selleck, who looks to be right at Walker's height in that picture, stands at 6ft4 at least.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Sep/16
@Streichs: I imagine Clint Walker is down at least 2in from his peak if not 3in...but the photo with Tony Robbins (whose actually 6ft7!) really does catch my eye.
Rob, what do you make of that photo?
Editor Rob
@Streichs: I imagine Clint Walker is down at least 2in from his peak if not 3in...but the photo with Tony Robbins (whose actually 6ft7!) really does catch my eye.
Rob, what do you make of that photo?
Editor Rob he doesn't look much different than Walker, if you knock the footwear advantage off...but then, at that age he would be a couple of inches off his peak.
Canson said on 8/Sep/16
Legit 6'4 prime no doubt
Legit 6'4 prime no doubt
Streichs said on 25/Aug/16
Have a look at Selleck with 6ft6 Clint Walker and with Walker having a clear footwear advantage :
Click Here
Click Here
Also check out Selleck with 6ft6 Tony Robbins, not much difference there:
Click Here
Selleck is 6ft4 at least.
Have a look at Selleck with 6ft6 Clint Walker and with Walker having a clear footwear advantage :
Click Here
Click Here
Also check out Selleck with 6ft6 Tony Robbins, not much difference there:
Click Here
Selleck is 6ft4 at least.
Adam said on 24/Aug/16
This is Selleck with boxer Frank Bruno who is listed at 6ft 3. The difference seems to be at least an inch.
Click Here
This is Selleck with boxer Frank Bruno who is listed at 6ft 3. The difference seems to be at least an inch.
Click Here
Xhavier said on 21/Aug/16
Also, if you look at season 2 of Magnum Pi, episode 16, when Magnum is standing with the young hawaiian student, he is looking 1.5in to 2in shorter, and that young actor was 6ft 5in tall, so 6ft 3.5in peak may be much more reasonable.
Also, if you look at season 2 of Magnum Pi, episode 16, when Magnum is standing with the young hawaiian student, he is looking 1.5in to 2in shorter, and that young actor was 6ft 5in tall, so 6ft 3.5in peak may be much more reasonable.
Xhavier said on 21/Aug/16
In Mr. Baseball he was described as 6ft 3in in articles and the character/baseball player he was being was listed at 6ft 3in. And further to other comments below and pictures it does seem that his peak may have been 6ft 3.5in instead of 6ft 4in, but he still could have been 6ft 4in peak. Either way, a tall fellow, indeed.
In Mr. Baseball he was described as 6ft 3in in articles and the character/baseball player he was being was listed at 6ft 3in. And further to other comments below and pictures it does seem that his peak may have been 6ft 3.5in instead of 6ft 4in, but he still could have been 6ft 4in peak. Either way, a tall fellow, indeed.
grizz said on 3/Aug/16
I think he's strong 6'3 guy now. In Killers Katherine Heigl described him as "freakishly tall". That's strange, coming from a 5'8.5" girl.
I think he's strong 6'3 guy now. In Killers Katherine Heigl described him as "freakishly tall". That's strange, coming from a 5'8.5" girl.
The Man said on 3/Aug/16
Even in his prime, Selleck never gave off an impression of being a solid 6'4" man unlike Neeson, Seagal, Hasselhoff etc. Selleck needs a peak listing of 6ft 3.5in and a current height of 6ft 3in
Even in his prime, Selleck never gave off an impression of being a solid 6'4" man unlike Neeson, Seagal, Hasselhoff etc. Selleck needs a peak listing of 6ft 3.5in and a current height of 6ft 3in
Ejel Khan said on 20/Jul/16
14/1/16 clover inquired about Selleck's family, namely the pic with his dad and brothers. Tom was the runt of the litter and the shortest. His dad being 6'5" in his peak and his brothers 6'6.5 ".
14/1/16 clover inquired about Selleck's family, namely the pic with his dad and brothers. Tom was the runt of the litter and the shortest. His dad being 6'5" in his peak and his brothers 6'6.5 ".
Ian C. said on 17/Jul/16
Selleck did a pretty good job of playing Dwight Eisenhower, who was five foot ten. If you watch that show, you never get a sense that Selleck is unusually tall. This is an excellent example of how perceptions of height can be manipulated in movies.
Selleck did a pretty good job of playing Dwight Eisenhower, who was five foot ten. If you watch that show, you never get a sense that Selleck is unusually tall. This is an excellent example of how perceptions of height can be manipulated in movies.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 7/Jul/16
His shoes look normal enough, Streichs.
His shoes look normal enough, Streichs.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 7/Jul/16
His shoes look normal enough
His shoes look normal enough
Streichs said on 1/Jul/16
Rampage, just have a look at Hank's shoes.
Rampage, just have a look at Hank's shoes.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 30/Jun/16
That's a strange photo, Adam. Selleck does look every inch of 6ft4 there..but what really grabs me is Tom Hanks looking taller than Harrison Ford, John Candy and Ray Liotta!
That's a strange photo, Adam. Selleck does look every inch of 6ft4 there..but what really grabs me is Tom Hanks looking taller than Harrison Ford, John Candy and Ray Liotta!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Jun/16
I think 6ft3 flat today is definitely closer from watching Blue Bloods and can look a bit less at times. You could give him 6ft3½ peak since he did claim it but he usually claimed 6ft4. Between them I think is spot on. We don't have many weak 6ft4 guys.
I think 6ft3 flat today is definitely closer from watching Blue Bloods and can look a bit less at times. You could give him 6ft3½ peak since he did claim it but he usually claimed 6ft4. Between them I think is spot on. We don't have many weak 6ft4 guys.
Adam said on 22/Jun/16
Mathew, if Chevy Chase was 6ft3.5 in his prime, Selleck was certainly a "legit" 6ft4 and more.
Click Here
Mathew, if Chevy Chase was 6ft3.5 in his prime, Selleck was certainly a "legit" 6ft4 and more.
Click Here
Mathew Robinson (190 cm) said on 21/Jun/16
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Jun/16
A prime Hasselhoff back to back with a prime Selleck would have the edge, as would a Neeson, Goldblum, Morse or Lithgow
---
I agree all in their prime, Selleck would be edged out by the legit 6'4" crowd. I think today he's in the 6'2.75" - 6'3" zone at best, but back in his day he was 6'3.5" legit. You can even see in the picture with Moynahan on this page, he just looks under a legit 6'3" to me there.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Jun/16
A prime Hasselhoff back to back with a prime Selleck would have the edge, as would a Neeson, Goldblum, Morse or Lithgow
---
I agree all in their prime, Selleck would be edged out by the legit 6'4" crowd. I think today he's in the 6'2.75" - 6'3" zone at best, but back in his day he was 6'3.5" legit. You can even see in the picture with Moynahan on this page, he just looks under a legit 6'3" to me there.
Streichs said on 14/Jun/16
Here's Selleck with 6ft2,5 Jon Voight :
Click Here
and with 6ft3,5 Josh Duhamel where he was already becoming older :
Click Here
and with 6ft4,5 Dennis Haysbert where his huge head takes him to almost exactly the same level as Haysbert :
Click Here
I would say he was a genuine 6ft4.
Here's Selleck with 6ft2,5 Jon Voight :
Click Here
and with 6ft3,5 Josh Duhamel where he was already becoming older :
Click Here
and with 6ft4,5 Dennis Haysbert where his huge head takes him to almost exactly the same level as Haysbert :
Click Here
I would say he was a genuine 6ft4.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Jun/16
A prime Hasselhoff back to back with a prime Selleck would have the edge, as would a Neeson, Goldblum, Morse or Lithgow
A prime Hasselhoff back to back with a prime Selleck would have the edge, as would a Neeson, Goldblum, Morse or Lithgow
Mathew Robinson (190 cm) said on 6/Jun/16
I'm sorry, I think he struggles with 6'3" flat even today. 190 cm would be my guess. I would give him a 6'3.5" peak height though (although not the full 6'4").
I'm sorry, I think he struggles with 6'3" flat even today. 190 cm would be my guess. I would give him a 6'3.5" peak height though (although not the full 6'4").
Alex said on 18/Jan/16
I assumed that 193 cm for Tom was with the shoes, because without it, would be something like 194 or 195 cm in this photo. So, with the shoes he should reach 193, so Tom should be 190-191 barefoot. Almost all the heights on this site are calculated with footwear, it is obvious.
I assumed that 193 cm for Tom was with the shoes, because without it, would be something like 194 or 195 cm in this photo. So, with the shoes he should reach 193, so Tom should be 190-191 barefoot. Almost all the heights on this site are calculated with footwear, it is obvious.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Jan/16
He probably should have been taller. His dad was 6ft5 and his two brothers are 6ft6+.
He probably should have been taller. His dad was 6ft5 and his two brothers are 6ft6+.
John said on 16/Jan/16
In the above photo, Selleck's a mere 4cm taller than 177cm Moynahan (who is wearing 10cm high heels), while he's wearing 2-3cm dress shoes. Given that she has 7-8cm more footwear advantage, that should put Selleck at only 188-189cm, maybe 190 maximum. Selleck clearly needs a major downgrade. Sorry, but I'm not buying the 192 listing at all.
In the above photo, Selleck's a mere 4cm taller than 177cm Moynahan (who is wearing 10cm high heels), while he's wearing 2-3cm dress shoes. Given that she has 7-8cm more footwear advantage, that should put Selleck at only 188-189cm, maybe 190 maximum. Selleck clearly needs a major downgrade. Sorry, but I'm not buying the 192 listing at all.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Jan/16
Rob, could 6ft3¾ be closer for his peak?
Editor Rob
Rob, could 6ft3¾ be closer for his peak?
Editor Rob in one interview he did come out with the 3.5 range, but mostly says 6ft 4...always a possiblity of being a bit under 6ft 4. A guy like Hoff I don't think was under 6ft 4 at all, but Selleck maybe could have been a fraction.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 14/Jan/16
Click Here
Rob, any guesses on how tall his father and brothers were?
Editor Rob
Click Here
Rob, any guesses on how tall his father and brothers were?
Editor Rob his Dad might have shrunk a bit by then, maybe he was 6ft 3-4 range himself and brother a few inches taller 6ft 6-7 range
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 14/Jan/16
Moynahan looks 6ft2-3 in that photo w/h Selleck.
Moynahan looks 6ft2-3 in that photo w/h Selleck.
johnnyfive said on 16/Nov/15
I think Selleck is still 6'4. I saw him. I'm 6'0.5 and he completely towered over me when he walked by me (in sandals, no less).
I think Selleck is still 6'4. I saw him. I'm 6'0.5 and he completely towered over me when he walked by me (in sandals, no less).
Canson said on 9/Nov/15
Thanks Matt. I was wrong myself I always thought that was when Joe Manginello was on when the "wee bit comment came out". Either way it shows Conan really is 6'3 and not 6'4 like he claims. He has insisted more than one 6'4 person was 6'5.
Thanks Matt. I was wrong myself I always thought that was when Joe Manginello was on when the "wee bit comment came out". Either way it shows Conan really is 6'3 and not 6'4 like he claims. He has insisted more than one 6'4 person was 6'5.
Mathew Robinson (190 cm) said on 8/Nov/15
Sam said on 19/Aug/15
Selleck appeared many times with Conan O'Brien back when I watched that in the late 90s/early 00s. He always appeared to be a smidge taller than Conan and I vaguely remember height came up and Selleck said 6'4" and Conan pressed him and Selleck clarified that he was a bit over it...don't have a link right now unfortunately.
---
I know that happened with Liam Neeson, maybe that's what you're thinking of? They compared heights, Liam was taller, Conan insisted he must be 6'5" and Liam admitted to 6'4" "and a wee bit".
As for Selleck, he never looked a solid 6'4". 6'3.5" peak, 6'3" today.
Sam said on 19/Aug/15
Selleck appeared many times with Conan O'Brien back when I watched that in the late 90s/early 00s. He always appeared to be a smidge taller than Conan and I vaguely remember height came up and Selleck said 6'4" and Conan pressed him and Selleck clarified that he was a bit over it...don't have a link right now unfortunately.
---
I know that happened with Liam Neeson, maybe that's what you're thinking of? They compared heights, Liam was taller, Conan insisted he must be 6'5" and Liam admitted to 6'4" "and a wee bit".
As for Selleck, he never looked a solid 6'4". 6'3.5" peak, 6'3" today.
Jesse Stone said on 28/Oct/15
Mr. Tom Selleck is a 70 year old man. It's no shame to loose height within this age. And I can definitely believe that Selleck stood 6'4 Fall in his prime.
But looking at him nowadays he has not a good posture and apparently he has shrunk -which is again no shame-
Wie see him in this recent Video next to Michael Strahan who stated himself as "a bit oder 6'4 but not quite 6'5”
I see he has clearely more than an inch, maybe two in Selleck.
Click Here
Mr. Tom Selleck is a 70 year old man. It's no shame to loose height within this age. And I can definitely believe that Selleck stood 6'4 Fall in his prime.
But looking at him nowadays he has not a good posture and apparently he has shrunk -which is again no shame-
Wie see him in this recent Video next to Michael Strahan who stated himself as "a bit oder 6'4 but not quite 6'5”
I see he has clearely more than an inch, maybe two in Selleck.
Click Here
Adam said on 5/Oct/15
There's a whole series of fairly recent pictures of Selleck with 6'3,5" Josh Duhamel, footwear showing (just Google "Selleck Duhamel"). Selleck seems to have the edge in each one of those pictures.
There's a whole series of fairly recent pictures of Selleck with 6'3,5" Josh Duhamel, footwear showing (just Google "Selleck Duhamel"). Selleck seems to have the edge in each one of those pictures.
neil craig said on 2/Oct/15
I saw that Rockford Files episode too, but remember that James Garner was 20 years older than Tim and had several injuries too.
I saw that Rockford Files episode too, but remember that James Garner was 20 years older than Tim and had several injuries too.
jtm said on 30/Sep/15
i think that's more proof garner wasn't 6'2.
i think that's more proof garner wasn't 6'2.
jimbo said on 28/Sep/15
Just saw him dwarfing 6'2 James Garner on The Rockford Files - 6'5 may be good for Tom. Rick was in this episode too.
Just saw him dwarfing 6'2 James Garner on The Rockford Files - 6'5 may be good for Tom. Rick was in this episode too.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 23/Sep/15
Ron, is 6ft3 flat possible now at 70?
Editor Rob
Ron, is 6ft3 flat possible now at 70?
Editor Rob yes he could be heading to around 6ft 3.
Adam said on 15/Sep/15
Dave, you can actually watch the Conan episode (1998-02-17) on Youtube where Selleck gives his height, 6ft4, and Conan says he is "about" Selleck's height (at 6 min 22). Right at the beginning when Selleck comes on stage, he seems to be noticeably taller than Conan.
Dave, you can actually watch the Conan episode (1998-02-17) on Youtube where Selleck gives his height, 6ft4, and Conan says he is "about" Selleck's height (at 6 min 22). Right at the beginning when Selleck comes on stage, he seems to be noticeably taller than Conan.
Dave618 said on 11/Sep/15
Sam, you may be thinking of Liam Neeson; Conan was mentioning how Neeson looked taller than 6'4" and Neeson responded he was actually a bit over 6'4". I don't remember a Selleck appearance on Conan where Selleck mentioned his height,
Sam, you may be thinking of Liam Neeson; Conan was mentioning how Neeson looked taller than 6'4" and Neeson responded he was actually a bit over 6'4". I don't remember a Selleck appearance on Conan where Selleck mentioned his height,
Sam said on 19/Aug/15
Selleck appeared many times with Conan O'Brien back when I watched that in the late 90s/early 00s. He always appeared to be a smidge taller than Conan and I vaguely remember height came up and Selleck said 6'4" and Conan pressed him and Selleck clarified that he was a bit over it...don't have a link right now unfortunately.
Selleck appeared many times with Conan O'Brien back when I watched that in the late 90s/early 00s. He always appeared to be a smidge taller than Conan and I vaguely remember height came up and Selleck said 6'4" and Conan pressed him and Selleck clarified that he was a bit over it...don't have a link right now unfortunately.
Shane said on 31/May/15
He and Jeff Goldblum are both very tall.
He plays volleyball in the sand when he visits Hawaii at a private court and sure seems to still be 6'r around my 6'1 brother and other friends. He is definitely over 6'3, probably still about 6'4".
Just saw Jeff Goldblum at the airport, also a very tall man, though not as solidl in build as Selleck.
He and Jeff Goldblum are both very tall.
He plays volleyball in the sand when he visits Hawaii at a private court and sure seems to still be 6'r around my 6'1 brother and other friends. He is definitely over 6'3, probably still about 6'4".
Just saw Jeff Goldblum at the airport, also a very tall man, though not as solidl in build as Selleck.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 26/Mar/15
He's still very tall on Blue Bloods...
He's still very tall on Blue Bloods...
Adam said on 17/Mar/15
Selleck is clearly taller than 6'2 Jon Voight.
Selleck is clearly taller than 6'2 Jon Voight.
Jesse Stone said on 8/Mar/15
Rob, do you know the height of Kohl Sudduth, the Co-star in Tom Selleck's "Jesse Stone"? In some scenes he appears taller than Selleck, in some scenes about the same height and in some he seems to be just a bit smaller:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Thank you!
Editor Rob
Rob, do you know the height of Kohl Sudduth, the Co-star in Tom Selleck's "Jesse Stone"? In some scenes he appears taller than Selleck, in some scenes about the same height and in some he seems to be just a bit smaller:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Thank you!
Editor Rob not really aware of him so not sure!
John said on 7/Feb/15
Looks about the same as 6'2 David Ramsey on Blue Bloods.
Looks about the same as 6'2 David Ramsey on Blue Bloods.
Gonzalo said on 3/Feb/15
Not the best picture to judge but in it Selleck looks very close in height to Jeff Goldblum
Click Here
Not the best picture to judge but in it Selleck looks very close in height to Jeff Goldblum
Click Here
Jesse Stone said on 29/Jan/15
Happy Birthday Mr. Selleck! Today with 70 I still believe he has a decent height and is around 6'3.
Happy Birthday Mr. Selleck! Today with 70 I still believe he has a decent height and is around 6'3.
Barker said on 28/Dec/14
Tom is 6' 2 1/2" in barefeet.
Tom is 6' 2 1/2" in barefeet.
Western Star said on 27/Nov/14
I've just watched an old episode of The Rockford Files and Tom towers over Jim Garner.
I've just watched an old episode of The Rockford Files and Tom towers over Jim Garner.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Nov/14
Rob, could 6ft3¾ be closer for his peak since he's claimed both 6ft3½ and 6ft4?
Rob, could 6ft3¾ be closer for his peak since he's claimed both 6ft3½ and 6ft4?
Jesse Stone said on 12/Nov/14
@Rob! Do you belive that Mr. Selleck lost 2 inches as described below? Well, it's right that he wears boots that make him a little taller, but really what height do you give him nowadays in 2014?
Thank you.
Editor Rob
@Rob! Do you belive that Mr. Selleck lost 2 inches as described below? Well, it's right that he wears boots that make him a little taller, but really what height do you give him nowadays in 2014?
Thank you.
Editor Rob no I think 2 inches is too much, but losing an inch isn't impossible
mike said on 24/Oct/14
I'd give 6ft 3.5-3.75 peak.
I'd give 6ft 3.5-3.75 peak.
184.3cm said on 12/Oct/14
At least 192cm in his prime, very tall man. Looked similar to Hasselhoff when he did Knight Rider.
At least 192cm in his prime, very tall man. Looked similar to Hasselhoff when he did Knight Rider.
Jesse Stone said on 11/Oct/14
Rob, how tall is Boomer Esiason by the way? Is he 6'4 or 6'5?
If he is 6'4, Selleck is about 6'2.75 or 6'2 1/2.
--> Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Editor Rob
Rob, how tall is Boomer Esiason by the way? Is he 6'4 or 6'5?
If he is 6'4, Selleck is about 6'2.75 or 6'2 1/2.
--> Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Editor Rob not really sure on Boomer's height, but today big Tom could be heading nearer 6ft 3 flat.
Here's an amusing photo of Tom with Wahlberg Click Here.
I'm going to call that a 'Donnie Bag'. Whenever your needing a few inches boost just put it on the ground and stand on it.
Here's an amusing photo of Tom with Wahlberg Click Here.
I'm going to call that a 'Donnie Bag'. Whenever your needing a few inches boost just put it on the ground and stand on it.
Jesse Stone said on 10/Oct/14
I saw many movies with Selleck and I belive his peak height was 6'4. He could still be about 6'2 - 6'3. Loosing height in his age is not uncommon.
Here a photo of him in "Jesse Stone: Thin Ice" from 2009. In that scene he is at the airport and is a lot taller than everybody else there.
--> Click Here
I saw many movies with Selleck and I belive his peak height was 6'4. He could still be about 6'2 - 6'3. Loosing height in his age is not uncommon.
Here a photo of him in "Jesse Stone: Thin Ice" from 2009. In that scene he is at the airport and is a lot taller than everybody else there.
--> Click Here
Flyboy said on 10/Oct/14
I saw the Ferrari from Magnum on sale on an auction site a few years back and the description of the car said it had the driver's seat modified to accommodate Tom Selleck's height.
I saw the Ferrari from Magnum on sale on an auction site a few years back and the description of the car said it had the driver's seat modified to accommodate Tom Selleck's height.
James said on 7/Oct/14
I have seen Tom Selleck many times in the recent past. (later years, after losing some height to "father time") I give him 6'2.75." He wears boots a lot and those make him a tad under 6'4." Based on his age and poor posture, I'd guess that he was a strong 6'4" back in his P.I. days. He loomed over everyone in that show! A few super random notes about Selleck. He was 35 years old when Magnum began in 1980. He was in either 6 or 8 failed TV shows before he hit gold with Magnum. He was first offered the role, over H. Ford, as lead in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" but had to turn the role down because he had a contract to do the Magnum pilot. Magnum was only able to start shooting after a writers' strike and, during the strike, Tom was so poor that he worked as a handyman. He stayed the last 2 seasons of Magnum because he was worried about the cast and felt guilty over killing their income and disappointing fans. Selleck's father was 6'5" and his brother, Dan, is 6'7" so he is the runt. Owns and often works on his avocado ranch. Super nice guy. He will sign autographs until everyone, who wants one, is pleased.
I have seen Tom Selleck many times in the recent past. (later years, after losing some height to "father time") I give him 6'2.75." He wears boots a lot and those make him a tad under 6'4." Based on his age and poor posture, I'd guess that he was a strong 6'4" back in his P.I. days. He loomed over everyone in that show! A few super random notes about Selleck. He was 35 years old when Magnum began in 1980. He was in either 6 or 8 failed TV shows before he hit gold with Magnum. He was first offered the role, over H. Ford, as lead in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" but had to turn the role down because he had a contract to do the Magnum pilot. Magnum was only able to start shooting after a writers' strike and, during the strike, Tom was so poor that he worked as a handyman. He stayed the last 2 seasons of Magnum because he was worried about the cast and felt guilty over killing their income and disappointing fans. Selleck's father was 6'5" and his brother, Dan, is 6'7" so he is the runt. Owns and often works on his avocado ranch. Super nice guy. He will sign autographs until everyone, who wants one, is pleased.
Rey said on 5/Oct/14
Tom is another gent who has lost about 2 inches. He does not have the posture or stature of his Magnum P.I. days. There is a recent pic of him and Boomer Esiason. Boomer has him by an 1-2 inches.
Tom is another gent who has lost about 2 inches. He does not have the posture or stature of his Magnum P.I. days. There is a recent pic of him and Boomer Esiason. Boomer has him by an 1-2 inches.
Jesse Stone said on 2/Sep/14
Rob, do you know how tall Kohl Sudduth, his co actor in Jesse Stone is? Seems To be At least AS tall AS Selleck.
Rob, do you know how tall Kohl Sudduth, his co actor in Jesse Stone is? Seems To be At least AS tall AS Selleck.
James B said on 20/Jun/14
Donnies a probably on tip toes
Donnies a probably on tip toes
Guy said on 11/Jun/14
I dont know why Rob, but here looks like 186 with 178 Donnie Wahlberg Click Here
Editor Rob
I dont know why Rob, but here looks like 186 with 178 Donnie Wahlberg Click Here
Editor Rob looks short there yeah, well, 2 inches shorter than he should
dbinaz said on 11/Jun/14
Anyone know what size shoe he wears?
Anyone know what size shoe he wears?
zackstra said on 8/Jun/14
The guy was 6'4" peak.
The guy was 6'4" peak.
Alan R said on 18/Mar/14
Taller than Ted Danson, who is 6'2". Taller than Dennis Weaver who was 6'2". Think about this: Did you EVER see him riding in the Ferrari with the top ON? Nope. If he wasn't 6'4", he was danged close.
Taller than Ted Danson, who is 6'2". Taller than Dennis Weaver who was 6'2". Think about this: Did you EVER see him riding in the Ferrari with the top ON? Nope. If he wasn't 6'4", he was danged close.
James B said on 15/Mar/14
I cant picture this guy being a full 2 inches above 6'2.
I cant picture this guy being a full 2 inches above 6'2.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 30/Dec/13
His father was 6ft6
His father was 6ft6
Thomas said on 16/Dec/13
I stood next to him 4 years ago. I am 6ft2 (188 cm) and I was slightly taller than him. I would guess he is about 6ft 1 now and his peak height was 6ft2.
I stood next to him 4 years ago. I am 6ft2 (188 cm) and I was slightly taller than him. I would guess he is about 6ft 1 now and his peak height was 6ft2.
Lenad said on 14/Dec/13
was at most 1.5 inches taller than ted danson
was at most 1.5 inches taller than ted danson
Dave618 said on 13/Dec/13
Watched an old Magnum rerun today and came here to see how tall ol' Tom was/is. I have no problem whatsoever believing he was 6'4" at his peak. He looks freaking' huge in that series, and he usually wore boat shoes or sneakers, or barefoot on the beach and he still looks extra-tall. Maybe a half-inch or so less now, or maybe not even that. Still looms at or near 6'4".
Watched an old Magnum rerun today and came here to see how tall ol' Tom was/is. I have no problem whatsoever believing he was 6'4" at his peak. He looks freaking' huge in that series, and he usually wore boat shoes or sneakers, or barefoot on the beach and he still looks extra-tall. Maybe a half-inch or so less now, or maybe not even that. Still looms at or near 6'4".
Xhavier said on 13/Nov/13
His peak should be downgraded to 6'3.5, since that's what he claimed.
Also in Mr. Baseball (1992), he appears to be 1 full inch shorter (at least) than co-star Dennis Haysbert (6ft 4.5in).
His peak should be downgraded to 6'3.5, since that's what he claimed.
Also in Mr. Baseball (1992), he appears to be 1 full inch shorter (at least) than co-star Dennis Haysbert (6ft 4.5in).
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Sep/13
"Tom Selleck's height is 6ft 3.25in (191cm)"
Might still be 192cm. Not under 6ft3 flat
"Tom Selleck's height is 6ft 3.25in (191cm)"
Might still be 192cm. Not under 6ft3 flat
Brooke said on 20/Aug/13
Why is peak height listed 6'4 when he claimed 6'3.5?
Why is peak height listed 6'4 when he claimed 6'3.5?
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 14/Aug/13
"Peak height was 6ft 3.75in (192cm)"
Reasonable since he claimed 6ft3.5 aswell as 6ft4. Usually looked either of those. Still a strong 6ft3 at least today.
"Peak height was 6ft 3.75in (192cm)"
Reasonable since he claimed 6ft3.5 aswell as 6ft4. Usually looked either of those. Still a strong 6ft3 at least today.
TSM said on 27/May/13
In the Magnum series, Roger Mosely regularly wore lifts that added a good 3 to 3.5 inches to his height. There were many scenes with them standing together, Selleck in his bare feet or in sneakers, and he was never less than at least three inches taller than Mosely who was wearing those lifts; that would put Mosely at 5'10 at the most.... but he was a very powerful looking man.
In the Magnum series, Roger Mosely regularly wore lifts that added a good 3 to 3.5 inches to his height. There were many scenes with them standing together, Selleck in his bare feet or in sneakers, and he was never less than at least three inches taller than Mosely who was wearing those lifts; that would put Mosely at 5'10 at the most.... but he was a very powerful looking man.
Jer1 said on 12/May/13
Maybe shorter now with age, but he was an easy 6-4 during his Magnum stardom and well into his time on Friends. Sometimes people are exactly what they look like and that was the case with Selleck.
Maybe shorter now with age, but he was an easy 6-4 during his Magnum stardom and well into his time on Friends. Sometimes people are exactly what they look like and that was the case with Selleck.
b said on 31/Mar/13
no he 6'4 or 6'5
no he 6'4 or 6'5
James said on 22/Feb/13
6'4 I can defnintly believe for tom selleck. He can look 6'3 as well I guess.
He never looks as low as 6'2 though.
6'4 I can defnintly believe for tom selleck. He can look 6'3 as well I guess.
He never looks as low as 6'2 though.
Arch Stanton said on 17/Jan/13
Watched Monte Walsh the other day and Selleck look the same height as John Wayne in the cowboy boots. At time he could look 6'2" but when they showed him at a differenyt camera angle compared to some of the other guys you could see he is very tall. 6'3.5" I think, but his height isn't obvious like several other western actors of that height. He can look 6'2 a lot on screen like Eastwood and Wayne.
Watched Monte Walsh the other day and Selleck look the same height as John Wayne in the cowboy boots. At time he could look 6'2" but when they showed him at a differenyt camera angle compared to some of the other guys you could see he is very tall. 6'3.5" I think, but his height isn't obvious like several other western actors of that height. He can look 6'2 a lot on screen like Eastwood and Wayne.
Trent said on 16/Jan/13
They weren't actually both barefoot, Arch. Here, look at this: Click Here
It's very briefly onscreen, but you can see there Selleck is actually in slippers--probably only taking 1/4" or so from them, but every bit counts. Later the scene cuts away though and this time you can see Selleck is barefoot now for some reason, but it seems when they were standing face-to-face like that Selleck did take a bit of footwear advantage.
Click Here
I'd say, accounting for the footwear advantage, Schwimmer could be 6'0.25. And I'll crosspost this to his page.
They weren't actually both barefoot, Arch. Here, look at this: Click Here
It's very briefly onscreen, but you can see there Selleck is actually in slippers--probably only taking 1/4" or so from them, but every bit counts. Later the scene cuts away though and this time you can see Selleck is barefoot now for some reason, but it seems when they were standing face-to-face like that Selleck did take a bit of footwear advantage.
Click Here
I'd say, accounting for the footwear advantage, Schwimmer could be 6'0.25. And I'll crosspost this to his page.
Arch Stanton said on 14/Jan/13
If Selleck was 6'3.5" peak, David Schwimmer is struggling with even 6'0.5". Selleck had between 3 and 4 inches on him., both barefoot on Friends.
If Selleck was 6'3.5" peak, David Schwimmer is struggling with even 6'0.5". Selleck had between 3 and 4 inches on him., both barefoot on Friends.
Mathew said on 12/Jan/13
Trent says on 29/Dec/12
His peak should be downgraded to 6'3.5, since that's what he claimed.
---
Yeah if he said 6'3.5" in '87 that's probably what he should be listed at, not higher.
Trent says on 29/Dec/12
His peak should be downgraded to 6'3.5, since that's what he claimed.
---
Yeah if he said 6'3.5" in '87 that's probably what he should be listed at, not higher.
Jay said on 3/Jan/13
His peak is 6'4.
His peak is 6'4.
Trent said on 29/Dec/12
His peak should be downgraded to 6'3.5, since that's what he claimed.
His peak should be downgraded to 6'3.5, since that's what he claimed.
Johnnyfive said on 3/Dec/12
Now that i think about it, 192 is considerably taller than 184 thus why i felt short close to him. You're right, Shaun. Also Tom might've had slight ground advantage.
Now that i think about it, 192 is considerably taller than 184 thus why i felt short close to him. You're right, Shaun. Also Tom might've had slight ground advantage.
James said on 11/Oct/12
No way was tom selleck over 193cm peak shaun
No way was tom selleck over 193cm peak shaun
Silent d said on 27/Sep/12
The funny thing was craig ferguson was a couple on inches shorter than tom but he does have terrible posture. 192cm easy.
The funny thing was craig ferguson was a couple on inches shorter than tom but he does have terrible posture. 192cm easy.
Shaun said on 9/Sep/12
Well if he was the same height/fractionally taller than Josh he surely can't be under 6'3.5" nowadays.
Well if he was the same height/fractionally taller than Josh he surely can't be under 6'3.5" nowadays.
Shaun said on 9/Sep/12
3 inches is not towering. But if he is near 4 inches I can see how you could feel noticeably shorter and view him as very tall. I think he's nearer 6'3" today but looked at least 6'4" in his prime.
3 inches is not towering. But if he is near 4 inches I can see how you could feel noticeably shorter and view him as very tall. I think he's nearer 6'3" today but looked at least 6'4" in his prime.
Johnnyfive said on 2/Sep/12
I saw Tom Selleck around 2005 when I was working security and he walked about 7 feet away from me. I'm 6'0.5 and Tom totally towered me by more than 3 inches. I think he really is 6'4 and perhaps taller in the 80s.
I saw Tom Selleck around 2005 when I was working security and he walked about 7 feet away from me. I'm 6'0.5 and Tom totally towered me by more than 3 inches. I think he really is 6'4 and perhaps taller in the 80s.
JIMMYV said on 27/Aug/12
In the picture with Whalberg he is not standing up straight and still has about 506 inches.. He was probabably 6-4 6-4 and a half during Magnum, but now at 67 is more like 6'3and a half-6'4...
In the picture with Whalberg he is not standing up straight and still has about 506 inches.. He was probabably 6-4 6-4 and a half during Magnum, but now at 67 is more like 6'3and a half-6'4...
Jonas said on 12/Jun/12
Just saw him on Conan Show and he was definitely 1 inch shorter than Conan who is listed as 6'4. So Selleck nowadays is more 6'3-ish
Just saw him on Conan Show and he was definitely 1 inch shorter than Conan who is listed as 6'4. So Selleck nowadays is more 6'3-ish
LG69 said on 14/Feb/12
@jake, Roger Mosley was usually listed at 6'2", but was closer to 6'1"-6'0 at his peak. He was at Thunder Valley Casino with some of the cast of Magnum P.I. for autograph signing. Roger looked no more than 5'11". Btw, Larry Manetti looked about 5'6"...doesn't look like he lost height from his Magnum days.
@jake, Roger Mosley was usually listed at 6'2", but was closer to 6'1"-6'0 at his peak. He was at Thunder Valley Casino with some of the cast of Magnum P.I. for autograph signing. Roger looked no more than 5'11". Btw, Larry Manetti looked about 5'6"...doesn't look like he lost height from his Magnum days.
Tommy said on 9/Feb/12
He did claim 6'3.5 in some old magazine. It was posted here a while back. I wonder if someone has a picture of it. I'd go with 6'3.5.
He did claim 6'3.5 in some old magazine. It was posted here a while back. I wonder if someone has a picture of it. I'd go with 6'3.5.
jake, 1.82 m- 1.83 m- 1.84 m said on 29/Jan/12
I'd estimate for the cast members of Magnum: 193 cm for Selleck, 169 cm for Hillerman, 170 cm for Manetti and 184 cm (6" 0.5 at peak) for Mosley.
I'd estimate for the cast members of Magnum: 193 cm for Selleck, 169 cm for Hillerman, 170 cm for Manetti and 184 cm (6" 0.5 at peak) for Mosley.
jake, 1.82 m- 1.83 m- 1.84 m said on 27/Jan/12
Rob did you ever watch Magnum PI? If so, how tall do you think his co-star Roger E. Mosley was? He is listed 6' 2" yet looks 4 inches shorter than Selleck.
Editor Rob
Rob did you ever watch Magnum PI? If so, how tall do you think his co-star Roger E. Mosley was? He is listed 6' 2" yet looks 4 inches shorter than Selleck.
Editor Rob not seen it for so long I can't remember much about Roger. It is very probable he's lost a bit of height now as in photos a few years ago he doesn't look near 6ft 2.
steven said on 14/Jan/12
he is 0.5" taller than josh duhamel.
he is 0.5" taller than josh duhamel.
Silent d said on 19/Nov/11
He was tall next to 192cm josh duhamel. Probably the same height. He towered over 164cm courtney cox. She was a little above his shoulder. He has bad posture though.
He was tall next to 192cm josh duhamel. Probably the same height. He towered over 164cm courtney cox. She was a little above his shoulder. He has bad posture though.
Shaun said on 4/Nov/11
Danson 6'1" er?? Pushing 190cm peak, looks a legit 6'2.5" . Danson has an inch on Pierce Brosnan. Maybe 6'2" flat today. Why must you downgrade EVERYBODY by an inch LAN Jiao, its getting tiresome. You'd claim Rob Paul is 5'7.25" too!
Danson 6'1" er?? Pushing 190cm peak, looks a legit 6'2.5" . Danson has an inch on Pierce Brosnan. Maybe 6'2" flat today. Why must you downgrade EVERYBODY by an inch LAN Jiao, its getting tiresome. You'd claim Rob Paul is 5'7.25" too!
Shaun said on 4/Nov/11
Selleck had 3-3.5 inches in his socks next to David Schwimmer so he was close to 6'4" as I can't see Schwimmer under 6'0.5".
LAN Jiao says on 17/Oct/11
selleck is solid 1^9m he is 3cm top over ashton kutcher. selleck father is 6'5
Kutcher is 189cm!!! SO that;s why he looked 3cm taller as he's 192cm range now.
Selleck had 3-3.5 inches in his socks next to David Schwimmer so he was close to 6'4" as I can't see Schwimmer under 6'0.5".
LAN Jiao says on 17/Oct/11
selleck is solid 1^9m he is 3cm top over ashton kutcher. selleck father is 6'5
Kutcher is 189cm!!! SO that;s why he looked 3cm taller as he's 192cm range now.
Sasha said on 1/Nov/11
Here
Click Here
Tom Selleck has a 0.5 inch over 6'2" Ted Danson. He stands not so straight, so, maybe, the real difference is 1 inch. So, Selleck is 6'3".
Here
Click Here
Tom Selleck has a 0.5 inch over 6'2" Ted Danson. He stands not so straight, so, maybe, the real difference is 1 inch. So, Selleck is 6'3".
LAN Jiao said on 26/Oct/11
selleck is 6'3.25 now.
selleck is 6'3.25 now.
LAN Jiao said on 20/Oct/11
ted danson always look 3cm shorter than selleck. ted is 6'1.5 and selleck 6'3
ted danson always look 3cm shorter than selleck. ted is 6'1.5 and selleck 6'3
Mr. R said on 19/Oct/11
@ Curt
Can you post the pic of Tom's niece's wedding with the whole family? It will be interesting to see Tom as "the runt"!
@ Curt
Can you post the pic of Tom's niece's wedding with the whole family? It will be interesting to see Tom as "the runt"!
LAN Jiao said on 17/Oct/11
selleck is solid 1^9m he is 3cm top over ashton kutcher. selleck father is 6'5
selleck is solid 1^9m he is 3cm top over ashton kutcher. selleck father is 6'5
joe said on 12/Oct/11
the comments on selleck and being the runt in a pic, from a rather tall family, most 6 foot plus, what makes us look even bigger is most are 230 pounds and up
the comments on selleck and being the runt in a pic, from a rather tall family, most 6 foot plus, what makes us look even bigger is most are 230 pounds and up
Suzan said on 18/Sep/11
I love tall men. My husband was 6'4". I'm only 5'7". That made us a nice fit for each other.
I love tall men. My husband was 6'4". I'm only 5'7". That made us a nice fit for each other.
James said on 2/Sep/11
Mr. R well its not like its easy too tell 6'3 from 6'3 1/2 :)
At his peak he was defnintly 6'4. no more and no less.
Mr. R well its not like its easy too tell 6'3 from 6'3 1/2 :)
At his peak he was defnintly 6'4. no more and no less.
Mr. R said on 22/Aug/11
I saw Tom Selleck a few years ago at Robert Urich's funeral. He was 6-3.
I saw Tom Selleck a few years ago at Robert Urich's funeral. He was 6-3.
Cranberries (18m, 193cm) said on 20/Aug/11
Can anyone link to those Selleck family wedding pics? At my height, I'm just about average for a guy in my extended family, so I'm interested what Selleck's looks like.
Can anyone link to those Selleck family wedding pics? At my height, I'm just about average for a guy in my extended family, so I'm interested what Selleck's looks like.
Joakim Ã…gren said on 20/Aug/11
Tom Selleck was never taller then 6'3.5" (192cm) tall in his prime. Now days he is no more then 6'3" or 190.50cm barefeet. Look at this photo where he is next to 6'1" Keith Carradine who is 6'1"(185.5cm): Click Here you can see there is only a couple of inches in difference making Selleck 6'3". Here is another shoot where he is next to 6'2" (188cm)Ted Danson: Click Here you can see there is no more then 1" or a couple of centimeters between them once again confirming the 6'3" estimate. So he is not 6'3.5"(192cm) as he is listed as here, more like 6'3"(190.5cm). He might have been 6'3.5" max in his prime but never 6'4".
Tom Selleck was never taller then 6'3.5" (192cm) tall in his prime. Now days he is no more then 6'3" or 190.50cm barefeet. Look at this photo where he is next to 6'1" Keith Carradine who is 6'1"(185.5cm): Click Here you can see there is only a couple of inches in difference making Selleck 6'3". Here is another shoot where he is next to 6'2" (188cm)Ted Danson: Click Here you can see there is no more then 1" or a couple of centimeters between them once again confirming the 6'3" estimate. So he is not 6'3.5"(192cm) as he is listed as here, more like 6'3"(190.5cm). He might have been 6'3.5" max in his prime but never 6'4".
Reality said on 19/Aug/11
It's really correct.6'3.5-6'4 is right.
It's really correct.6'3.5-6'4 is right.
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.