MikeV10 says on 7/Feb/10
my estimations for this guys:
Chainz - 6`4
Crush - 6`5,5
Harris bros - 6`6,5
Click Here
NCL says on 6/Feb/10
btw one of the Harris Bros walks behind Kane at the 1:08 mark so they're on an even plane. He is in motion but just wanted to point it out. NCL says on 6/Feb/10
This is the closest thing I can find with Harris Bros, Kane and Undertaker. Judge for yourselves. Kane enters at about the 1 min mark, UT shortly after:
Click Here George says on 6/Feb/10
harrıs boys were lısted at 6-6 ın wcw jake-O says on 6/Feb/10
i meant 2-2.5 inches that taker had over crush. and those twins had at least that over crush as well. brandon JaCobs aka jake-O says on 4/Feb/10
Cz Youre a nut! dude those two are either the same height or taller than kane! u r crazy! look at the height those guys had over crush, who was only 2 inches or 2.5 inches over taker, and those guys looked to have 2-3 inches over crush. so obviously, everyone believes in kayfabe. kane and taker are either the same height, or kane has a little over em. although at royal rumble 03 taker appeared the taller of the two, so who knows there. but the harris twins are every bit as tall as tyler mane who has about 1 inch on taker. soo until I see proof, I agree with justin bailey and benjamin jones. Cz says on 4/Feb/10
Guys, I definately think that Taker was a strong 6'8.5.. Today, I think he's a legit 6'8. He still fairs pretty well next to Khali (7'0.5).. Big show is 6'11-6'11.5 today.. Sid I think was 6'7.5-6'8.. During his face off with the Undertaker at Mania 13, they looked to be about the same height.. And as for Kane not looking taller than the Harris brothers??? Kane is a legit 6'8.. I think both of the Harri's Brothers are 6'6.5.. Kane with his 1.5 inch lifts meant he stood at 6'9.5.. Had 3 inches on the Harris Brothers ATLEAST.. Live DEBACO says on 30/Jan/10
Im willin and able to bet that taker was 2 shades under 6'8'' years ago, and probably a few shades over 6'7''. This estimate does seem accurate. he can look anywhere between 6'6-6'9''. Paul says on 28/Jan/10
Vegas says on 27/Jan/10
'some of them are good and some of those are awful estimations'
thanks Vegas. hs2010 says on 28/Jan/10
That pic Vegas just posted of Hogan with legit 5'10" Kurt Angle shows that Hogan is nothing under 6'3"-6'3.5" today.
Enough with the stupid "Hogan is 6'2"" posts! Vegas says on 27/Jan/10
some of them are good and some of those are awful estimations, hogan can't be 6'2 range seeing as he had 5-6 inches on kurt angle last thursday night Click Here
roberts has never been 6'6, jbl either, austin at 6'2+ is lol, met the guy on numerous occasions, he is just over 6ft, big show has lost 2.5 inches at 37 wtf, nash taller than andre?? sid 4 inches shorter than nash?? MikeV10 says on 27/Jan/10
John Layfield 6'6.5"
Undertaker 6'7.0" today
Click Here
i don`t Think so Clay says on 26/Jan/10
Hahaha so the Big Show of the 90's is an inch taller than the Khali of today?
Riiiiight. Anonymous says on 25/Jan/10
Hulk Hogan 6'5" peak....6'2.5" today
Jake Roberts 6'6.25" peak.... 6'4" today
Stone Cold 6'2.25"
John Layfield 6'6.5"
Undertaker 6'7.5" peak 6'7.0" today
Kane 6'8.5"
Shawn Michaels 6'0" peak 5'11" today
Blackjack Mulligan 6'6.5" peak 6'6" today
Big Show 7'1" 6'10.5" today
Andre the Giant 6'10" peak
Kevin Nash 6'11
Sid 6'7 peak 6'6" today
Big John Studd 6'6" peak
Great Khali 7'0" today
Belated happy new year.... NCL says on 24/Jan/10
Frank says on 21/Jan/10
I dont remember Shawn being shorter than Bret Bret has been listen @ 5ft 11 to 6ft I know the WWF listen him @ 6ft 1 but he probably 5ft 11
Also Shawn Michaels has been looking a bit crossed eyed lately ??
I been noticing that too ... I guess the poor guy was hit in the head with a chair too many times. says on 23/Jan/10
man Bret and Shawn are and have always been the same height. Frank says on 21/Jan/10
I dont remember Shawn being shorter than Bret Bret has been listen @ 5ft 11 to 6ft I know the WWF listen him @ 6ft 1 but he probably 5ft 11
Also Shawn Michaels has been looking a bit crossed eyed lately ?? The Ben says on 10/Jan/10
Ennis512 says on 10/Jan/10
Hulk Hogan 6'6" peak....6'3.5" today
Jake Roberts 6'5.25" peak.... 6'4.75" today
Stone Cold 6'1.25"
John Layfield 6'6"
Undertaker 6'8" peak 6'7.5" today
Kane 6'8"
Shawn Michaels 6'0" peak 5'11.5" today
Blackjack Mulligan 6'6.5" peak 6'5.5" today
Shad Gaspard 6'6"
R.A.Ennis (myself) 6'7"
If shawn michaels is 5'11.5 then bret hart is nearly 6'1.. Ennis512 says on 10/Jan/10
Hulk Hogan 6'6" peak....6'3.5" today
Jake Roberts 6'5.25" peak.... 6'4.75" today
Stone Cold 6'1.25"
John Layfield 6'6"
Undertaker 6'8" peak 6'7.5" today
Kane 6'8"
Shawn Michaels 6'0" peak 5'11.5" today
Blackjack Mulligan 6'6.5" peak 6'5.5" today
Shad Gaspard 6'6"
R.A.Ennis (myself) 6'7" Ray says on 5/Jan/10
Big Show 7'0.5" - 7'1" peak; 6'11.5"-7' today
Andre the Giant 6'11" peak; I don't think the giant quite ever reached the 7' mark
Kevin Nash 6'10 (maybe just scraped it)
Undertaker 6'8" seems right; today 6'7" and change if he lost anything at all
Sid 6'7 peak
Big John Studd 6'7" peak
Hulk Hogan 6'6" peak; 6'3" and change today; maybe 6'4" if he can stand straight.
Great Khali 7'1" today Vegas says on 5/Jan/10
so LSU alum you think big show was 1.5 inches taller than shaq despite being shorter than shaq at 37 years old justin bailey says on 4/Jan/10
Im gonna have to say that I believe takers max barefoot heightt is 6'7.5''. I also believe that the harris twins stand a little taller than taker. when kane wore his frankenstein lifts he barely stood over those two skyscrapers for brothers. taker and kane are probably 6'7.5'' at most while the harris twins stand between 6'8'' and 6'9'' in close range with tyler mane and nash. LSU Alum says on 4/Jan/10
peak:Big Show 7'1"
Andre 7'0"
Nash 6'10"
Taker 6'8"
Studd 6'8.5" Anonymous says on 3/Jan/10
peak heights:
Big Show 7'0
Andre the Giant 6'11
Kevin Nash 6'9
Undertaker 6'7.5
Sid 6'7
Big John Studd 6'6.6
Hulk Hogan 6'5.5 Anonymous says on 31/Dec/09
Happy New Year and much blessings to you all! Frank says on 27/Dec/09
Shock I met Todd that day i met Taker and was was very short but when he's on the air with the WWF he wore Big Heels or lifts because he was no way as tall or taller than Paul Bearer Shock says on 26/Dec/09
Click Here I'm pretty sure Nash was 1.5" taller than Taker. Todd Pettengill looks rather insignificant in the back. Anonymous says on 26/Dec/09
Nash and Show some years ago: Click Here
'Taker and Show current: Click Here
No shots of footwear though. Robby says on 25/Dec/09
Backstage segment hyping up the six man tag team match with Owen Hart, Yokozuna and British Bulldog vs. Undertaker, Diesel and Shawn Michaels. shows Yokozuna and Owen next to each other. Diesel and HBK and Diesel and Undertaker Click Here Shock says on 24/Dec/09
Joe, that Army guy is clearly standing on something and is probably no more than 6', the dead giveaways are his head height and arm length.
Frank, I've said before that if Taker's head was not tilted down in the pic with you here, you'd be up to his labret. Taker's got a nearly 11" noggin, I'd say he's nearly if not 9" taller as of 1993, and as is he's just over 8" taller. People don't realize that the top of his head is at least halfway into the top part of his hat. Ghost says on 23/Dec/09
That army guy in the photo with Taker seems to be standing on something. Maybe he was recieving a medal or something or maybe he is standing on something as a joke to look the same height as Taker. That's a pretty common thing to do with tall people around.
He does not look like a 6'9 guy at all, compare their heads for example. Looks more like a 5'8 guy. Frank says on 17/Dec/09
Joe that day when i met him he looked huge the picture doesent do it justice
And i said to him Damm you are tall how tall are you he said 6ft 9 Joe says on 17/Dec/09
Frank, thanks for the comment. Yeah i thought u looked about 6'1 in that picture. If the person basing the "6'7.5" height didnt know u were on a slope and had a height advantage over Taker then it might seem like hes only 6'7. but im Sure hes a solid 6'8! he said it himself in "this is my yard" that is he 6'8/9 and i remember on smackdown years ago they made an error when doing the stats and it came up with Undertaker at 6'8. Hes certainly no shorter than that as hes within 3/4 inches of Big Show. I hope whoever makes the final decision that they look at the evidence and make Taker 6'8. Collin says on 11/Dec/09
I'd say that the Undertaker today is a solid 6'8", no question about it. He definitely is not any less than that. Frank says on 11/Dec/09
Joe your right that Picture with me and Taker is in 1993 but it does show how much taller he is than a 6ft guy and again i look taller because we were standing on an upward slope like in a Movie Theather and i was standing Slightly behind him Joe says on 11/Dec/09
Taker - 6'8"
Sid - 6'7"
Hogan - 6'4" The Seth says on 11/Dec/09
Seth Anderson's height is 5 ft 8.75 in ( 175 cm ) ....that's me.
looks like shock isn't the only one who does the .25 thing, I do it as well Red says on 7/Dec/09
Click Here
Taker 6´7.75"
Sid 6´7"
Hogan 6´5" Joe says on 5/Dec/09
i wouldn't take the word of Jesse Ventura to bo honest... and obviously we don't know if they are on the same ground level but if we could assertain who the army person is we could find out his height and it might make a good example because hes around the undertakers height and isn't a wrestler. So there shouldn't be any mystery surrounding his height.
In any case i still think we should find a better main picture for the site. Why we have the current one is beyond me..... its so old! JT says on 4/Dec/09
Vegas, I think Robinson entered the US Navy when he was around 6'6" and then grew another 6 or so inches during his Navy stint. Like Hogan, Ventura's usually full of B.S. but there is a general limitation on height in the US armed services. They'll still find you a spot if you're over 6'8" and really want to join. You just can't perform certain tasks, like operating a tank or flying a fighter plane. Vegas says on 4/Dec/09
Anonymous says on 3/Dec/09
You know Joe, in regards to your photo of the Undertaker with that Army guy: It's interesting because i was listening to an interview with Jesse Ventura, and he mentioned that the military won't accept you if you're more than 6'7.
well thats more ventura BS as here it clearly states
(a) 4) Add 6 pounds per inch for males over 80 inches Click Here
80 inches on its own equalling 6'8, of course 7ft david robinson was in the us navy Click Here Tim says on 4/Dec/09
Joe, on that photo it is still a question whether they are all standing on the same plain. hs2009 says on 4/Dec/09
Yeah, that guy in the army must be 6'9" or so. It would be great to find out for sure though. Joe says on 3/Dec/09
that maybe only applying to front line active army members. i think you can have a different profession in the army and still be let in. it would be silly to have a height restriction on, lets say... a cook!
but all of that aside, would be very interesting to find out who that is and how tall he is. Marotte says on 3/Dec/09
I think the guy is standing on something or taker is lifting, because he does not have the proportion of a man that tall. Anonymous says on 3/Dec/09
You know Joe, in regards to your photo of the Undertaker with that Army guy: It's interesting because i was listening to an interview with Jesse Ventura, and he mentioned that the military won't accept you if you're more than 6'7. Danimal says on 27/Nov/09
Shock,
Your .25" thing is very creepy. Joe says on 27/Nov/09
Someone should really update the main picture of this website. its probably 15 years old. Find a better picture! i have one in mind. but it would require finding out the identity and height of someone in the army. its from 2006.
Click Here
picture shows taker in normal clothes standing next to a tall military person probably atleast 6'8-9. Would be very cool to find out who that is and how tall he is. Shock says on 26/Nov/09
JT, Taker was more than 1" taller than Sid, not 0.5", at WM13 in the best staredown they've ever had where Sid is not tip toeing, he's about 1.25" taller in the staredown. You are simply "making up" the footwear scenario for Taker in 1999 as well with your "inner boost" theory (there's another shot in my pic post that shows the same boots), as the bottoms of his feet are clearly not where you illustrate.
I once said that at WM13 Sid's boots looked suspect to internal lifts, and they completely do, and others said "No no, you're wrong, you're just a fanboy, nothing odd there." BS. They are completely ignoring a blatant comparison of Sid's footshape in two different sets of boots and writing it off to phantom impossibility. He is wearing lifts at WM13 and there's no question, but nope, I'm wrong because Taker's not "allowed" to be 6'8", and has nothing to do with evidence. Strangely, many people think Sid is at least 6'7".
The only way Taker has an advantage on Show in street clothes is if Show's in total flats, which he might very well be, but that's still only 0.5" or so difference and doesn't cover the remaining gap.
Taker is 2.5" shorter when Show is slouching, 3.5" shorter when he's not, and for all of his career except since JeriShow, as he's seemed to have changed boots again recently, Show's had a footwear advantage so the real difference is about 3.25"
Click Here for various comparisons
Daniel, I don't know of anyone on here who believes Hogan was 6'3.5" peak and also thinks Undertaker was 6'8" peak. I believe PEAK Hogan was 6'6", and around 6'5.5" by the time he squared off with Taker, 2.75" was not and impossible difference, but sadly we never got any kind of real comparison with them until Hogan shrunk under 6'5".
6'3.5" peak Hogan would = 5'11" Vince McMahon peak, and we don't need to go any further with that, so whoever believes that is obviously delusional. Ray says on 26/Nov/09
Hogan was probably around 6'6" at peak. Also, the best and most recent staredown for Undertaker/Big Show is the triple threat tag team match from the recent RAW not from 1999 - 10 years ago, unless you are trying to compare their heights from then. But for today you have to look at recent stuff. Daniel_Sweden says on 26/Nov/09
somebody still claims hogans peak height was 6'3.5 and many believes the undertaker was at his peak 6'8 so my question is did the undertaker have 4 1/2 inches on hogan 1991? i can't see almost 5 inches different between them...i mean 4 1/2 inches is 11.5 cm...peak hogan 6'5.5 JT says on 26/Nov/09
The only way Taker gets within 3 inches of Big Show is if the latter is slouching. When Big Show stands straight, the large height difference becomes apparent.
Click Here (Taker had a footwear advantage here)
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here (slight camera advantage for Big Show)
There’s no 0.9” footwear advantage for Big Show back in 1999. The “sole” on Taker’s boot may look small but the bottom of the feet are actually well above that level, indicating a large inner boost (it doesn't mean they are "lifts"). Click Here Plus, Big Show’s boot is closer to the camera.
Taker was not within 2 inches of Nash when you could see their full bodies in the ring, and Nash looked around 3 inches shorter than Big Show. If Taker edged out 6'7" tops Sid, it was by no more than 0.5 inches and that's only b/c of his odd-shaped head. Shock says on 25/Nov/09
Clay, I think 6'6.5" Undertaker = more like 6'11.25" Khali tops.
Click Here I get 4.5" - 4.75" there.
Interestingly enough, there would seem to be about 5.25" difference between their eyes if Taker wasn't looking up, so Khali's forehead, definitely smaller than Taker's even with a slightly larger head in general.
Khali: 7'1"
Big Show: 6'11.5"
Undertaker: 6'8.25"
or
Khali: 7'0.25"
Big Show: 6'10.75"
Undertaker: 6'7.5"
or
Khali: 6'11.25"
Big Show: 6'9.75"
Undertaker: 6'6.5"
My point is, you can't have it both ways, when you increase or decrease one, they all have to feel the effect. I don't understand how people are seeing more of a difference than their actually is when there are no actual examples of it. Shock says on 25/Nov/09
I have watched so many clips tonight, looked at a bunch of pictures new and old, and I can't find anything that suggests Taker is any more than 3.25" shorter than Big Show except in 1999 when Show has a footwear advantage (1.5" vs 0.6" boots). Even then, Taker is within Show's forehead range, which is illustrated in their 4-19-99 staredown.
Click Here and here Click Here about 4" taller with nearly 1" footwear advantage.
When you compensate the boot difference, it goes right back to the 3-3.5" difference. There they are, standing up as straight as can be, and even with a near 1" footwear advantage, Big Show's still not quite a full forehead taller. I don't think there's any question that the max true height difference is less than 3.5". It's always been and still is.
Click Here here is another staredown from 1999 with Big Show at similar posture as the recent staredown, magically coming out about 2.75" taller. He's not in wrestling boots, looking to be in comparable footwear to Taker's. In the first pic he only looks maybe 2" taller due to "whatever is making him look only 2" taller." It's amazing how much the gap closes anytime footwear is even and Show is not standing up totally straight, but to say there's 2" or more of lost height is ridiculous. It's probably not even 1". The evidence is right there in front of you guys.
If Big Show was 4" taller, Taker wouldn't even come up to his eyebrows in 1999 based on footwear, and he's over them. Clay says on 25/Nov/09
You're the only one claiming 6'6.5 Danimal. Alex concedes the height loss but says Taker is still likely 6'7'', which is still a little too low IMO. Clay says on 25/Nov/09
Calloway at 6'6.5 leaves Khali at 6'11.5 or 7'0. Anonymous says on 25/Nov/09
Danimal on The Undertaker
Taker - Peak 6'7.5" Today 6'6.5"
Big Show - Peak 7'0.5" Today 6'11"
that is low of you Danimal (pun intended). I'm sure Taker is 6'7.5 now" and was 6'8" peak. Joe says on 24/Nov/09
no way danimal. why on earth do you think that!
undertaker is no shorter than 6'7.75 today, but my bets are he is a SOLID 6'8. in his prime he was a near 6'9.
it's weird how there is so much debate. big show is deffinatly 7'0 and taker is no more than 4 inches shorter than him. hs2009 says on 24/Nov/09
There's 4" between Taker and Big Show today, the same difference as 10 years ago. So unless both men have lost the exact same amount of height in the past decade, which is highly improbable, I'm not buying height loss for either man. Just bad posture combined with different camera angles can make them look shorter, but when they stand straight you can see how tall both guys really are.
Plus, if Undertaker is 6'6.5" that makes JBl 6'3.5". This is total BS because we know JBL was the exact same height as legit 6'5" General Odierno. Big Show was also only 1"-1.5" shorter that 7'1" Shaq when they had comparable footwear on, so anything less than 6'11.5" for Show today isn't right either IMO. Shock says on 24/Nov/09
Big Show: 6'11.5"
Undertaker 6'8.25"
JT, even in the pic you posted, Big Show is still only coming out 3" taller ignoring any footwear difference. His head is leaning very far back making his forehead look smaller, only representing about 2/3 of what it is compared to his head. If what you see represents 4", then Big Show's head is 16" tall, and you cannot be serious if you think Taker is standing up straight in the chokeslam pic.
Click Here
Taker is within 1/4 of Big Show's forehead range, there's no way it's 4"
86 - 82.5 = 3.5" difference in bills, not 4+.
I love how some of you are pointing out that Big Show is leaning forward in the staredown, again just as I did, but somehow he is losing *2"* from this, but when Taker leans forward in various other staredowns, he's still considered at full height. Show's losing no more than 1".
Danimal, if Undertaker is 6'6.5" today, then Kane is under 6'6". Danimal says on 23/Nov/09
Taker - Peak 6'7.5" Today 6'6.5"
Big Show - Peak 7'0.5" Today 6'11" JT says on 23/Nov/09
WWE bills Big Show and Taker as only 1.5” apart now, so Big Show is not going to stand tall next to Taker in a staredown. Click Here
Taker’s about as tall as he’s going to be here, as he is standing straight and on one leg. Big Show looks close to 4 inches taller and could stand taller if he wanted. Both had comparable footwear too. In 1999, WWE often referred to Big Show as 7'2" so a 4+ inch height differential was acceptable. miko says on 22/Nov/09
3.5/4" between Show and Taker.
Undertaker is closer to the camera, Undertaker is standing straight, Big Show is looking down, look at his damn neck!
Remember that from the eyes up its over 5" on the Big Show's forehead. If Show straightens out there you see a bigger gap - simple. Shock says on 22/Nov/09
One more Taker and Show - Click Here - again I know Show is not quite at full posture here, but he's still only coming out about 2.5" taller.
So either Big Show is about 6'10.5" or Undertaker is just over 6'8". Shock says on 22/Nov/09
Big Slouch only coming out 2.5" taller than Taker Click Here
He's no more than 3.5" taller in respective boots. 4 to 5" is straight up impossible. Joe says on 21/Nov/09
Undertaker and big Show had a staredown on smackdown this week. Undertaker looked about 3-4 inches shorter. if big show is a solid 7'0 then taker would be about 6'8
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here Shock says on 21/Nov/09
In 1999, Big Show had nearly a 1" boot advantage on Taker (1.5" vs .6") and then he did look about 4.5" taller. Today he has maybe .25" footwear advantage and Taker is within Big Show's forehead range. That's a bad comparison pic but he's about 3.5" shorter there as is with Big Show at bad posture but closer to the camera. Ray says on 21/Nov/09
Here's the Taker/Big Show staredown from Smackdown earlier tonight. Show looks to be closer to 3" taller though his posture could be a little better. Staredown starts at 5:10; I paused at 5:14 and it's a pretty good look.
Click Here JT says on 20/Nov/09
Shock, IIRC Rob may have said the average forehead height is around 4”, with 4.5” from the eyes up. At least that’s the general consensus on this site. The 4” forehead height may be a bit large though, especially since at what point do you start measuring it (some people have arched eye brows, some more straight across). On second thought, it’s probably more in the 3.75” range from the eye brows up for the average person.
This is Big Show next to Vegas’s 6’4” friend. It’s been a while, but IIRC Vegas said his friend’s head was at least 10.25" long (I seem to recall an even larger size). I’m the same height and my noggin’s ~10.25". This assumes his friend’s head is 10”, 10.25", and 10.5” long
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Because of the low camera angle and Big Show being taller than Vegas’s friend, the height of Big Show’s head is a bit longer than how it comes out here.
If Taker’s head is really 11 inches long, then Big Show’s is probably 12.5 to 13 inches long.
Regarding Andre, this is assuming John Studd had an 11 inch long head, which there’s no way that he did: Click Here The 13 inch mark is above the scalp. Andre's head was probably around 12 inches. While Andre’s head from the eyes down was enormous, it was average-sized Click Here Click Here (but very wide) from the eyes up. If he had a more proportioned head, it easily would have been closer to 13 inches.
I think we are getting way too detailed in this discussion:) Ray says on 20/Nov/09
I would say around 4" between Show and Taker (could be a little less but I don't think it's more than 4"). Looks like Taker comes up a little past Shows eyebrows. This makes sense since Taker is about 5" shorter than Khali. In my opinion of course. hs2009 says on 20/Nov/09
Yeah, Undertaker is and has always been 4" shorter than Big Show. So unless both men have lost the exact same amount of height at the same rate, then I'm not really believing that either has lost any height. Just posture issues, different boots, camera angles etc. can make them look shorter than they really are. JT says on 20/Nov/09
Click Here Looked like the same 4-5 inch difference as it was 10 years ago Click Here Shock says on 18/Nov/09
Taker was 5" taller than Trips on RAW even with Trips on a slightly higher plane from the straight on camera. He's probably about 5.5" taller, or half his head height.
I think regardless of Taker's hairline, his percentage of skull above his eyes is more than just about anyone.
Click Here
Vegas, I wonder if he's still nursing the knee injury, might not be able to do as much cardio which could also be why his matches have been shorter and less involved recently.
Clay, Triple H definitely does not have lifts, his boots are 1", I'm still undecided about Taker's, either 1 or 1.2", sometimes the length of his foot makes them look 1" currently.
Also there was one vague close quarters exchange with Taker and Show where Taker came out very well on him, hopefully we'll get a staredown at the PPV.
Here's another shot from wwe . com with Kane and Taker from SD Click Here
JT, 5" Big Show forehead I think results in over 13" for his skull. I really don't know if he's more than 4.5". Andre definitely had a 12" head, since it was about 2" taller than Hogan's. Hogan's got a pretty large head and Andre dwarfed him. Clay says on 17/Nov/09
I actually thought HHH looked tall next to Taker. Hunter must wrestle in lifts I think. Ray says on 17/Nov/09
Yeah, The Undertaker certainly towered HHH last night on RAW. Taker also looked tall next to the Big Show. Pause here at 7:42
Click Here
You can also see the Undertaker/HHH staredown a few seconds before this. Ray says on 17/Nov/09
Yeah, Taker certainly towered HHH last night; he also looked very tall next to Big Show.
Pause here at 7:42
Click Here
You can also see the Taker/HHH staredown a few seconds before this. JT says on 17/Nov/09
Taker has a longish forehead but the nature of his receding hairline adds to the illusion. Early in his career, his mullet style hair, with the puffy top, made his head appear larger than it was as well. Albert has a bigger forehead than Taker, considering that he's looking up Click Here Big Show's noggin is fairly well proportioned (sep. compared to Khali), but with a 12+ inch long head, the forehead size is going to be at least 5 inches. Andre the Giant had probably at least a 12 inch long head as well, but most of the length came from the eyes down, like Khali. Vegas says on 17/Nov/09
taker looked 5 inches taller than HHH last night on raw, takers always had 5 inches on trips even as far back as 1999 so i am convinced now any height loss for the big guy is minimal
speaking of taker, met him again along with lots of other SD guys and gals over the weekend, looks to have put on weight Shock says on 16/Nov/09
I've always gotten Khali's head at about .5" shorter than Big Show's total, the way his chin is shaped makes it kinda hard to judge depending on the angle, can you make an example of where your divisions are? We might be basically talking about the same thing just different starting points. Proportionally, Show's forehead is normal, someone like Taker, has a gigantic forehead, Khali's kinda small all things considered. JT says on 14/Nov/09
Shock, I matched the heads up from the chin level. Their heads are of similar length from the eyes down (Big Show's looks slightly longer - maybe around 1/4") but from the eyes up, it's probably more than a 1 inch advantage for Big Show. Khali probably has close to 4.5" from his eye brows to the top of his head. That same distance for Big Show looks at least an inch longer. His forehead is gigantic. Shock says on 14/Nov/09
JT I'm getting about 4.25" - 4.5" from the eyebrows up for Big Show. What do you consider "forehead" because I always thought it was eyebrows up, Khali about a 4-4.25" forehead. It seems like you're starting at the eyes because the center of Big Show's head is the very middle of his nose. JT says on 12/Nov/09
Click Here Probably no less than a 5.5" forehead on a 12+ inch head. Shock says on 11/Nov/09
I'm 5'8", with a 9'5" head, about a 4.5" forehead, but my eyes are also virtually in the center of my skull. Big Show's head is about 12" tall, and his eyes are well into the upper half of his head, fairly symmetric division into 3rds, I would say 4.5" is pretty reasonable and I'm going to stick with that for now. I've seen some pics where he's got his head tilted foreward and it looks like more, and some tilted back where it makes his forehead look tiny. Shaun says on 11/Nov/09
Looks every inch of 6'8" to me. Scary mother ****** miko says on 8/Nov/09
Shock, how on earth can Big Show have a 4" forehead.
I have a 4.5" forehead an I'm a 6"0 non-acromegalic guy, 5"8 Rob the Editor's head is also around this range. Big Show's is at least 5.5" from his eyes up. Shock says on 7/Nov/09
Danimal Taker is within Big Show's forehead range with a slight footwear disadvantage, so Big Show is probably between 3 and 3.5" taller than him. Even in 1999 Taker was up to Big Show's eyebrows with nearly 1" disadvantage. Big Show's forehead is about 4"-4.5".
I think Akebono and Taker are virtually identical height, Taker might have a slight edge. The Albert Taker picture is highly suspect as Albert may have a nearly 1" footwear advantage, and I simply do not believe Albert is is anyway a dead even 6'6", it makes a difference. 6'6" Albert put Taker at 6'6.5" by comparison, a 1" advantage puts Taker at 6'7.5", and Albert is probably mroe than 6'6" even. Compared to so many other guys it's just not possible. He's closer to 6'7" than 6'6". Even with Akebono Albert has come out nearly his height with a 1" footwear advantage, same as Taker. If Albert is 6'6" even, Akebono is 6'7 or 7.5" Spence says on 5/Nov/09
My god he looks every bit of 6'8 in that photo with Frank...over a 182 guy looks to have 8 inches easily Vegas says on 5/Nov/09
akebono was listed at 204cm in sumo which is 6'8.3
this article is very specific about what height and weight he was at certain periods
Mar 1988 200cm and 334lb
Jan 1989 202cm and 340lb
Mar 1990 203cm and 386lb
Sep 1990 204cm and 411lb
Click Here Red says on 5/Nov/09
Danimal says on 4/Nov/09
Red, where are you getting this 1/4" and 1/3" from????
Just from the pixel´s.
I don´t think UT is as tall as Akebono, Akebono would edge Taker out!
Akebono is a strong 6´8"
Undertaker is a strong 6´7"
Bernard is 6´6" Rest is footwear advantage Danimal says on 4/Nov/09
Red, where are you getting this 1/4" and 1/3" from???? Clay says on 4/Nov/09
Danimal and Alex have no explanation as to why Taker is so tall next to Khali, other than Taker must have been in 2.5 inch lifts?
Taker is still 6'7.75-6'8 down from a peak of 6'8.5ish. PERIOD. tuga says on 4/Nov/09
Red says on 4/Nov/09
tuga, in that vid Akebono has a much wider stand than Bernard.
Click Here this is very close to the truth
Click Here
Taker has also a wider stance than albert and look at albert´s feet...he´s on his tip toes for sure, look at your photo, albert is more relaxed...
All of this evidence posted here all just show similar heights between taker and akebono: 6'8. Red says on 4/Nov/09
tuga, in that vid Akebono has a much wider stand than Bernard.
Click Here this is very close to the truth tuga says on 4/Nov/09
Vegas says on 3/Nov/09
anyone come up with a good explanation as to why taker was slightly taller next to khali than kane??
Easy one, for the same reason he and jbl looked close in height until taker stood tall next to him exposing the real diference...answer: POSTURE
JT says on 4/Nov/09
Taker in Lugz-style boots was basically the same height as Albert/Matt Bloom, when Albert in those same type boots was noticeably shorter than 6'8" Akebono in boots with paper-thin soles....
Click Here
Take a look or pause anywhere from 3:32 to 3:37, how do explain that? Is Akebono even any taller than albert?? Please do take some screen caps and draw the lines. JT says on 4/Nov/09
Vegas says on 3/Nov/09
anyone come up with a good explanation as to why taker was slightly taller next to khali than kane??
...and Kane was not wearing small-heeled boots with Khali, and why Taker in Lugz-style boots was basically the same height as Albert/Matt Bloom, when Albert in those same type boots was noticeably shorter than 6'8" Akebono in boots with paper-thin soles.... Vegas says on 3/Nov/09
anyone come up with a good explanation as to why taker was slightly taller next to khali than kane?? hs2009 says on 3/Nov/09
There was a clear 5" difference between Taker & Khali but no more. Stefan says on 3/Nov/09
Khali/Taker. Max. difference here: 12,7cm/5". Click Here
Khali/O´Neal. Equal. Click Here (Shaq is a save 2,16 m/7-1). Taker is 6-8 and Khali 7-1. Clay says on 2/Nov/09
It was max 6 inches between Khali and Taker which leaves Calloway MIN. 6'7''. tuga says on 1/Nov/09
Danimal says on 1/Nov/09
Big Show had more than 3" on Taker post 2001. When Big Show stood fully straight, it was more like 4-5" on Taker.
It could be 4 inches, 5 inches I just can´t see, khali had 5 inches on taker and has 1 on big show just like shaq.
7'1 for khali and shaq, 7' for big show and 6'8 taker are fair estimates for them. Big show and taker have bad posture, so most of the times they look shorter...I´ll give that. Danimal says on 1/Nov/09
tuga says on 1/Nov/09
Danimal says on 31/Oct/09
Taker was marginally taller than MAX 6'6" Albert in 2001 in their infamous staredown.
Yes, but when you´re only 2 inches shorter than someone bigger footware and just a little better posture can do miracles...
If you put taker at under 6'7 you have tou put khali and shaq at under 7', big show 6'10, kane under 6'7 as well, jbl at 6'3 range and etc etc.
Big Show had more than 3" on Taker post 2001. When Big Show stood fully straight, it was more like 4-5" on Taker. tuga says on 1/Nov/09
Danimal says on 31/Oct/09
Taker was marginally taller than MAX 6'6" Albert in 2001 in their infamous staredown.
Yes, but when you´re only 2 inches shorter than someone bigger footware and just a little better posture can do miracles...
If you put taker at under 6'7 you have tou put khali and shaq at under 7', big show 6'10, kane under 6'7 as well, jbl at 6'3 range and etc etc. Danimal says on 31/Oct/09
Taker was marginally taller than MAX 6'6" Albert in 2001 in their infamous staredown.
Only 2 guys on this entire site who believe that Taker is below 6'7" today: Myself and Alex. I also believe that Kane is a 6'7" guy, as was Sid. Taker was slightly taller than Sid in the 1990's. Da Man says on 31/Oct/09
I've said it for 3 years now, Taker is not under 6'7" today, or even a flat 6'7" for that matter. Over the last few years as he's leaned and gotten back into good shape, he looks as tall as he ever did. His so called height loss was really just a loss of posture, IMO. Kane needs to get on Taker's regimen, it looked like he was having a lot of knee problems in the match with Jericho on the last SmackDown. Ray says on 31/Oct/09
I would say Undertaker definitely has 3" on JBL. Plus, Taker's knees are bent and his posture is loose in that pic Shock posted. Also, saying Taker is below 6'7" today is really almost impossible and really lowers heights of everyone else then. I also love how some poeple also claim Kane is 6'8.5" since that's what he has supposofly said himself but then say Taker is no more than 6'7" these days. Makes me laugh since they are about the same height (IMO I see Taker just a little taller). Da Man says on 31/Oct/09
Shock says,
"Taker is coming out 3.5" taller than JBL"
How in the world are you getting 3.5" out of that pic? miko says on 30/Oct/09
1992.
Staredown: Undertaker vs Sid Justice.
This is the best view we have of a staredown between them at 2:45, Undertaker might just shade it, but it's damn close.
If Taker really was near 6"8 at his peak then Sid is well over 6"7.
Click Here Shock says on 30/Oct/09
"Danimal says on 27/Oct/09
Taker hasn't been close to 6'8" since 2000. Below 6'7" today."
You're right, he isn't "close" to 6'8" anymore since he was over 6'8" as of this year: Click Here
Please actually look at the picture an analyze it. Taker is coming out 3.5" taller than JBL who is a minimum of 6'5" even. Taker has 1 boot layer advantage on JBL which = 0.3". The shortest we're looking at is 6'8.25". This is a good example of Taker not slouching and coming out virtually full height. You can see with the bend in his legs vs the rigid stance of JBL that may be even taller yet. The picture might even have some tilt in favor of JBL.
But, for the sake of argument, I'm going to humor the "below 6'7" comment for a minute and go over some things.
If Taker is below 6'7", then JBL is around 6'3.75", and Kane would be approaching 6'6" even since he's not as tall as Taker with a boot advantage. But ya know, maybe Kane actually is 6'6" even. I mean after all, PWI did list him as 6'7" and Taker as 6'8". That must be their max heights. I'll break the news to Mamun who is now reduced to 5'6.75" since Taker is below 6'7".
So, how tall is JBL then for real?
...below 6'7" Clay says on 29/Oct/09
I guess Khali is 6'11.5 then. Danimal says on 27/Oct/09
Clay says on 13/Oct/09
Taker and Kane are both 6'8''.
Taker hasn't been close to 6'8" since 2000. Below 6'7" today. mcfan says on 25/Oct/09
I'm pretty sure he used to claim 6'8 years ago, but was billed at 6'10. Chris Sneed says on 24/Oct/09
Rob, Im still not sure why people believe that psycho sid is shorter than the undertaker. I believe they are the exact same height 202 cm. I also believe that john nord the berzerker appeared to be taller than the undertaker. I wish there were photos that could change my mind! I also believe that earthquake rip, was as tall as taker comparing each other to yokozuna staredowns. these men hold their own against mr mark calaway. Clay says on 13/Oct/09
Taker and Kane are both 6'8''. James S says on 13/Oct/09
6'7? That sounds too short. From when I saw him in person, he is much closer to 7'0. I'd say his comment of 6'9-6'10 sounds right for him as Kane was about two inches taller. Shock says on 11/Oct/09
I just reread this part of my post:
"like these: Click Here - 2 layer with the extra stitched layer = about .75"
It should read .75" without the none standard half layer, so again just about 1" total. Big Show's boots are 0.9" in the front. Shock says on 10/Oct/09
Big Show's are slightly bigger than Angle's there, 3 layers in the front, 5 in the back, so 1.5" for Big Show, which he's virtually always had his entire career, but in different makes of boot.
Similar to these: Click Here with an extra layer. Those specifically, are 4 layer, 1.2"
Those red Angle boots I do remember now, look like they 2 front, 4 in the back, but they might not be exactly. Because he's tip toeing it does throw off the actual heel shape. Also, he didn't wear those for long in his career. His other boot types are definitely 0.6" and he's had them for a long time.
To go deeper, the boot designs are entirely different, and I'm talking about era defining different. Big Show's are a softer rounded sole, patent leather boot, and Angle's are more old school design.
like these: Click Here - 2 layer with the extra stitched layer = about .75", Angle's might have one more layer for just over 1" but I think it's the stepping position that is making it look like that. Again, I could be wrong, I'll have to look at more pics to be sure, but Big Show's are definitely at least a layer thicker.
I rarely see those old boots on the indy scene anymore, my partner happens to have a pair, but they are usually have a couple layers with a weird half stitched layer, making a 0.6" come out more like .75". You can see the discoloration between Angle's sole and the red of the boot, and that's the stitched layer. justin bailey says on 10/Oct/09
Hey shock, go to myspace vids. they took it off of youtube. and click on undertaker and kurt angle backstage. also, there is a guy standing next to taker that appears about three inches shorter. Vegas says on 10/Oct/09
nah shock, angles boots were bigger than 0.6 inches from time to time unless big show only wore 0.6 inch boots too, same 1 inchers there clearly worn by both men just different colours Click Here Shock says on 10/Oct/09
"Justin Bailey says on 9/Oct/09
Ok... there is a vid from 2002. its undertaker and kurt angle backstage when taker insulted angle and stated that he had a bad wig. angle is 5'10'' barefoot, and right around 6' in boots. he wasnt much shorter than vince mcmahon. now ppl, I am 6ft in shoes, and i had seen the advantage taker had over angle, 7-8 inches, i put a tape measure up and saw how much taker had over him, so, taker is about 6'8'' in his boots, and about 6'7 without!"
I believe Kurt Angle to be, more specifically 5'10.5" barefoot, and I must stress, his wrestling boots do not in any way shape or form give him 2". I believe the thickest boots he ever had (mind you I did not watch a ton of Kurt Angle matches) were 2 layer (0.6") for his normal wrestling boots
Click Here - you catch a little bit of the underside of the boot, and the shadow, but those are 1 layer front, 2 layer back = 0.6" in the most technical sense.
His other boot type which came later, is OTOMIX - Click Here
Those give probably 0.5", there's a funny incline right under the heel but clearly zero boost in the front and .5" under the pivot.
if Angle is 5'10" even barefoot, he's about 5'10.5" in the boots, I believe he IS 5'10.5" and about 5'11" in his boots.
Now, if you watch any matches where Angle and Taker, Taker generally has about a 0.6"- .75" boot advantage but he still comes out virtually an entire head taller than him. I'm gonna wager he's nearly 10" taller than Angle barefoot, at full posture, but here's a couple shots from a tag match, in the second one you can see how massive Taker's skull is.
Click Here Frank says on 9/Oct/09
Well that Video show what i thought Studd is about 6ft 6 and Ladd about 6ft 7
Ladd had bad posture but he stood would have been alittle taller than Studd so again Ladd does NOT APPEAR 6ft 9 Sorry Ray says on 9/Oct/09
"Shock says on 8/Oct/09
Griffin, can you post some pics where Kane comes out taller than Taker, and doesn't have a boot or camera advantage?"
Well said, I was going to actually post something similar. The answer is no, becaise Kane always had/has a boot advantage. Justin Bailey says on 9/Oct/09
Ok... there is a vid from 2002. its undertaker and kurt angle backstage when taker insulted angle and stated that he had a bad wig. angle is 5'10'' barefoot, and right around 6' in boots. he wasnt much shorter than vince mcmahon. now ppl, I am 6ft in shoes, and i had seen the advantage taker had over angle, 7-8 inches, i put a tape measure up and saw how much taker had over him, so, taker is about 6'8'' in his boots, and about 6'7 without! Shock says on 8/Oct/09
Griffin, can you post some pics where Kane comes out taller than Taker, and doesn't have a boot or camera advantage? Big Show says on 8/Oct/09
Shock says on 30/Sep/09
lsu alum, maybe post some pics? I'm on the fence about his height myself as he seems anywhere between 6'7" and 6'9" to me but I believe closer to 6'7" or 6'8".
Here's a video with Flair, Ladd and Studd. Studd looks the same height if not slightly taller. So I can't say that Ladd is looking 6'9" here, because Studd sure isn't 6'9" either (more like 6'7").
Click Here
Remember Ladd had extensive knee surgery in 1969 which pretty much ended his football career. His posture sucked most of the times. Griffin says on 7/Oct/09
Taker can't be at the same height as kane, taker is more like 6'6.5 pushing to 6'7. drk says on 2/Oct/09
I tend to agree with Shock here, Ladd looks within the 6'7"-6'8" range... probably closer to 6'8" if anything though. Shock says on 30/Sep/09
lsu alum, maybe post some pics? I'm on the fence about his height myself as he seems anywhere between 6'7" and 6'9" to me but I believe closer to 6'7" or 6'8". Frank says on 30/Sep/09
Isu Alum all im saying in alot of pictures he does not appear 6ft 9 too me Danimal says on 30/Sep/09
Ryan says on 26/Sep/09
hogan 6'5 3/4 and rock 6'2, ha ha ha, try same height jeremiah Click Here
In Hogan's prime he would have had 2.5"-3" on the Rock. I have NO DOUBT about that. lsu alum says on 30/Sep/09
I hate to call anyone an idiot,but anyone that says Ernie Ladd was not his full 6'9" is an idiot.Period ! JMan29 says on 30/Sep/09
My brother and I met Undertaker at a house show. My brother is a legit 6'7 and with the shoes he was wearing was closer to 6'8. Undertaker still had a good inch on him so I definatly buy 6'9 for a legit height.. Shock says on 28/Sep/09
Jeremiah - There's about .5" between Rock and Hogan today at most, and there's never a full 3" between them ever since the Rock reached adulthood. Great Khali has been billed 7'3" for quite some time now. They used to jump round from 7'2" to 7'4", and in Japan he had some crazy bills. However he definitely does not wear platforms, his boots are approximately 1.25", not exactly large for a guy his size. Ryan says on 26/Sep/09
hogan 6'5 3/4 and rock 6'2, ha ha ha, try same height jeremiah Click Here
khalis boots don't even have a heel ffs, they are nearly flat, kane wears platforms, at least try not to lie before typing stuff Jeremiah says on 25/Sep/09
I've met and seen some wrestlers. I'm eye to eye with Hulk Hogan, I'm 6'5 3/4" that's w/o shoes. Depending on my shoes I can reach almost 6'8". The Rock is at 6'2". Bill Goldberg is 6'3" (met him 4 times, 3rd time he recognized me). Scott Hall is shorter than me by a little. Sting is almost 6' 3". Rey Mysterio is 5' 2". Undertaker is 6'8". Kane is just a hair shorter than Kevin Nash. Nash is right at 6'10" I've seen a lot more and Height and weight is exagerated. And to add in the fact of the boots? Look at the great Khali he's listed at 7'5" (depends where you look) and look at his platforms, I mean boots....wonder why he doesn't run much? Shock says on 12/Sep/09
Mike, Lesnar is more like 6'2", and there were definitely some deceptive angles/posture issues with him. There's a chokeslam clip where you can see that Lesnar only comes up to about Taker's nose, not his eyebrows. general93 says on 11/Sep/09
sid and studd where the same height 6'7-8" and taker 6'8.5" jbl 6'6" crush 6'6" nash 6'10". mike says on 11/Sep/09
lesnar was about 4 inches shorter than taker ,and lesnar is listed at 6'3". Paul says on 9/Sep/09
Heenan was probably 5'11, surely 1.80m if not 1.81. He seemed slightly taller than Paul Bearer as I recall, who I would say would be a shade over 5'10, 1.79m. Electric says on 8/Sep/09
Vegas, there's a match between Studd and Gang on WWE classics in May. I screen capped the hell out of it and will make the folder public.
Studd is slightly taller. |
