|
routy says on 15/Mar/10
5'9 considering everything
rob is very generous again
J.J. says on 15/Mar/10
this is what a 1.5" difference looks like but yeah I think he could be 176cm because of footwear. Oleg says on 17/Jan/10
I think he's a weak 5'10 in the morning and strong 5'9 in the evening, more like 5'9.25(176cm). So 176cm is good Jamie says on 9/Jan/10
I'd say 5'9.75", in this photo he's got a relaxed posture. If he stood up straight he would look taller. Paul says on 11/Dec/09
Rob - In your picture Click Here you have him at 5'9.5", but you didn't subtract 1/3 inch to account for his footwear advantage. Doing so would put him only 1/6" over 5'9". Also, IMHO you've been a little generous where you've drawn the horizontal line that intersects the top of his head. I think this guy needs a downgrade to 5'9" even; maybe 5'9.25" if you're actually a little over 5'8" in that picture.
[Editor Rob: I would say with the height of the photographer that can sometimes have to be considered as knocking a fraction from height.] 5\'2flat says on 4/Dec/09
Why don't you downgrade him to 175cm, Rob? He doesn't look much taller than you. Smallbuild86 says on 19/Nov/09
Agree, five feet nine with flatter hair, but not sure about the .5, but that's being a bit generous. air jordan 23 says on 17/Nov/09
he is 5'9, the hair gives him a inch clearly, cause its hard to notice an inch differnce, onces there is atleast a 2 inch difference then you notice a height difference with somebody. I'd give him 5'10 with his hair like this. Anonymous 3 says on 12/Nov/09
From the pic below, with flat hair, Weber is 1m76. Atadsmaller says on 5/Nov/09
I'd say with flat hair, he'll be 1.75. Maribel says on 14/Oct/09
On the pic below, you're adding a little bit of height with a bit more hair, Rob. I kind of agree with rob89, you need to take off 2 cms more. Weber is barely taller than you. Anonymous 2 says on 13/Oct/09
I mean a particular, like adidas, nike, new balance, etc.
[Editor Rob: it wasn't a sneaker.] Kindashort says on 12/Oct/09
What kind of shoes did he have on?
[Editor Rob: he had 1.25 inch heel, I had 0.9 inch...] Kindashort says on 12/Oct/09
I'd say roughly 176m. Anonymous says on 10/Oct/09
I'd say flat 5-9. Daii says on 24/Sep/09
not a solid 5'10. 5'9.5 at best. Tad says on 20/Sep/09
I agree with Rob89. I'd say 1 cm lower. greg says on 5/Aug/09
i always thought he was like 6ft 2 or something, it's interesting how people come across as taller on TV rob89 says on 4/Aug/09
I see more 175-176 cm if you don't count his hair. Definitely not 5'10. Ryan says on 8/Jul/09
Out of curiosity what was his footwear Rob?
[Editor Rob: he had a good 1.25 inch, 1/3rd more than me.] Donatello says on 2/Jul/09
Solid 5'10" even when taking into account his hair. J.J. says on 1/Jul/09
Legit 1.5"-1.75" difference this is very clear Rob! Marc says on 29/Jun/09
If your shoe heels are even in this pic, I'd say that he's more like 5'10.5". It's not often you see a celebrity understate his height, but he does appear to have a good 2 inches on you, Rob.
[Editor Rob:
why are you using 3 names on here? Here...you can't tell height and you're wasting my time having to show what 2.5 inches looks like :)] miko says on 24/Jun/09
Definately over 5"9.
His hair does give him a 5"10 effect, when we know he isn't that tall.
Is he pulling a McKellen on you Rob? It looks like he's eating your shoulder.
[Editor Rob: my arm is just underneath his arm round his back.] |
