Add a Comment7822 comments
Average Guess (649 Votes)
Peak: 6ft 7.86in (202.8cm)
Current: 6ft 6.92in (200.4cm)
Peak: 6ft 7.86in (202.8cm)
Current: 6ft 6.92in (200.4cm)
The Seth said on 14/May/09
I am only 5'9" 140 lbs. small guy, I bet if I knew aikido like Seagal, I would take down any heavyweight. Chuck's no taller than I am and he beat all the bad guys up on Walker Texas Ranger. He even choked out a black guy in an episode when they were fighting in a pool, and the guy was a giant in comparison. Size doesn't matter, it's skill. That's why Dan Severn and Ken Shamrock aren't in WWE anymore, they're dangerous. They know martial arts. UFC rules.
I am only 5'9" 140 lbs. small guy, I bet if I knew aikido like Seagal, I would take down any heavyweight. Chuck's no taller than I am and he beat all the bad guys up on Walker Texas Ranger. He even choked out a black guy in an episode when they were fighting in a pool, and the guy was a giant in comparison. Size doesn't matter, it's skill. That's why Dan Severn and Ken Shamrock aren't in WWE anymore, they're dangerous. They know martial arts. UFC rules.
Da Man said on 14/May/09
The Ben, there are some UFC fighters that studied Krav Maga I'm sure, my point is that that a fighting style like Krav Maga doesn't necessarily lend itself to the octagon.
The Ben, there are some UFC fighters that studied Krav Maga I'm sure, my point is that that a fighting style like Krav Maga doesn't necessarily lend itself to the octagon.
sid said on 14/May/09
The Ben Your wrong again, Kane worksout everyday, he is in great shape for a 42 year oldman. In batista book, he says kane worksout more then anyone on the roster he worksout everyday. Kane isn't fat...Kane is still very strong. Kane is still benching 500 today, he he can rep 450 pounds no problem,I doubt 500 pounds is heavy for guys like kane, kane has scary strength. I BET YOU MY BOTTOM DOLLAR, KANE IS STILL ONE OF THE STONGTEST ON THE ROSTER...HE HAS NATURAL STRENGTH..STOP ASSUMING BEN..
The Ben Your wrong again, Kane worksout everyday, he is in great shape for a 42 year oldman. In batista book, he says kane worksout more then anyone on the roster he worksout everyday. Kane isn't fat...Kane is still very strong. Kane is still benching 500 today, he he can rep 450 pounds no problem,I doubt 500 pounds is heavy for guys like kane, kane has scary strength. I BET YOU MY BOTTOM DOLLAR, KANE IS STILL ONE OF THE STONGTEST ON THE ROSTER...HE HAS NATURAL STRENGTH..STOP ASSUMING BEN..
sid said on 14/May/09
Red Kane's Glenn jacobs coach said he was a good athetit, you can tell kane is a good athetit, look at what he does, a drop kick, flying clothline from the top ropes, hurricuranna on albert, he is a the best athelitc big man around..lots big men his stature cant do diddly. KANE IS A GOOD ATHELIT. YOU CAN TELL, HE HAS SHOOT EXPERIENCE, IN JAPAN, I'M PRETTY SURE HE CAN TAKE LOTS OF PEOPLE DOWN, HE HAS THE POWER. TO PUNCH, KANE YOU WOULD HAVE TO KNOCK HIM OUT TO WIN, KANE HAS A BIGGER HEAD, IF A GUY WHO WEIGHS 150, WONT FAZE KANE. I AM A FIGHTER I KNOW WHAT IM SAYING, SO IN TERMS TO THE BEN, HE DOESN'T KNOW DIDDLY
Red Kane's Glenn jacobs coach said he was a good athetit, you can tell kane is a good athetit, look at what he does, a drop kick, flying clothline from the top ropes, hurricuranna on albert, he is a the best athelitc big man around..lots big men his stature cant do diddly. KANE IS A GOOD ATHELIT. YOU CAN TELL, HE HAS SHOOT EXPERIENCE, IN JAPAN, I'M PRETTY SURE HE CAN TAKE LOTS OF PEOPLE DOWN, HE HAS THE POWER. TO PUNCH, KANE YOU WOULD HAVE TO KNOCK HIM OUT TO WIN, KANE HAS A BIGGER HEAD, IF A GUY WHO WEIGHS 150, WONT FAZE KANE. I AM A FIGHTER I KNOW WHAT IM SAYING, SO IN TERMS TO THE BEN, HE DOESN'T KNOW DIDDLY
Red said on 14/May/09
The Ben says on 14/May/09
Red
the video you put up is of amature wrestling...Are Kane and Andre amautere wrestlers????
Do you know the difference between Olympic wrestlers and WWE superstars??
I don
The Ben says on 14/May/09
Red
the video you put up is of amature wrestling...Are Kane and Andre amautere wrestlers????
Do you know the difference between Olympic wrestlers and WWE superstars??
I don
Yaspaa said on 14/May/09
The MMA guys are training 6 hours a day with the best guys in the world,they live breath and eat fighting. Krav Maga is a poor mans MMA. Did anyone see Chuck Liddell on this warriors against warriors show,here we have a fighter who is past his best still punching a bag with 1000lbs of force and he isn't even a heavyweight. Military self defence is basic at best it has to be. MMA is Bruce Lee's legacy,Krap Maga aint.
The MMA guys are training 6 hours a day with the best guys in the world,they live breath and eat fighting. Krav Maga is a poor mans MMA. Did anyone see Chuck Liddell on this warriors against warriors show,here we have a fighter who is past his best still punching a bag with 1000lbs of force and he isn't even a heavyweight. Military self defence is basic at best it has to be. MMA is Bruce Lee's legacy,Krap Maga aint.
The Ben said on 14/May/09
Red
the video you put up is of amature wrestling...Are Kane and Andre amautere wrestlers????
Do you know the difference between Olympic wrestlers and WWE superstars??
Red
the video you put up is of amature wrestling...Are Kane and Andre amautere wrestlers????
Do you know the difference between Olympic wrestlers and WWE superstars??
sid said on 13/May/09
The Ben Your a joke, I'm 240 benching over 400, I got hard punches from that..i Knocked a person out like 3 years ago in a fight.street fight..that strength I have helped me.
Da man Kane is still a beast, I'm sure kane can still bench 535. he scooped slammed khali, he is around 400 these days.. that takes alot of strength man.
The Ben Your a joke, I'm 240 benching over 400, I got hard punches from that..i Knocked a person out like 3 years ago in a fight.street fight..that strength I have helped me.
Da man Kane is still a beast, I'm sure kane can still bench 535. he scooped slammed khali, he is around 400 these days.. that takes alot of strength man.
MAMUN said on 13/May/09
Thank you my friend Red for your contributions ! In that last clip you posted,
A young Andre would always do exactly that kind of a move on Antoni Inoki !
And it also looks like Akari found another way to beat Andre ; " RUN & KEEP
RUNNING " !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Best regards
Supermun
Thank you my friend Red for your contributions ! In that last clip you posted,
A young Andre would always do exactly that kind of a move on Antoni Inoki !
And it also looks like Akari found another way to beat Andre ; " RUN & KEEP
RUNNING " !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Best regards
Supermun
Da Man said on 13/May/09
I'm a big MMA fan as well. But these guys just aren't trained to go for the kill, they are trained to KO and/or submit their opponent within a controlled environment. Krav Maga teaches you to exploit any and all vulnerabilities, to injure/maim, use the environment to your advantage, inflict damage, etc. While the MMA fighter is maneuvering for an arm-bar, the Krav Maga guy will be going to collapse wind-pipes or something along the lines. One is meant to be effective in life-or-death combat situations, the other is meant to effective in a ring.
I'm a big MMA fan as well. But these guys just aren't trained to go for the kill, they are trained to KO and/or submit their opponent within a controlled environment. Krav Maga teaches you to exploit any and all vulnerabilities, to injure/maim, use the environment to your advantage, inflict damage, etc. While the MMA fighter is maneuvering for an arm-bar, the Krav Maga guy will be going to collapse wind-pipes or something along the lines. One is meant to be effective in life-or-death combat situations, the other is meant to effective in a ring.
Red said on 13/May/09
The Ben, Andre didn
The Ben, Andre didn
Yaspaa said on 13/May/09
Yeah I was going from Kane now but really was just winding sid up hehe. You have hit on a nerve with The MMA though (I be loving me some ultimate fighting)I can't see anyone beating a good MMA fighter in fair fight,they can wriggle out of most situations,I can't see what a Krav Maga guy could do. The Octagon may have many rules now but it hasn't always and these MMA fighters will know plenty of illegal moves that they could utilise on the street,you make make a fair however.
Yeah I was going from Kane now but really was just winding sid up hehe. You have hit on a nerve with The MMA though (I be loving me some ultimate fighting)I can't see anyone beating a good MMA fighter in fair fight,they can wriggle out of most situations,I can't see what a Krav Maga guy could do. The Octagon may have many rules now but it hasn't always and these MMA fighters will know plenty of illegal moves that they could utilise on the street,you make make a fair however.
MAMUN said on 13/May/09
I am sorry for my last post " SHAME ON YOU MMA FIGHTERS " ! I think I may
crossed out of lines right there ! If anyone is offended by it then I appologize !
Kind regards
Mamun
I am sorry for my last post " SHAME ON YOU MMA FIGHTERS " ! I think I may
crossed out of lines right there ! If anyone is offended by it then I appologize !
Kind regards
Mamun
MAMUN said on 13/May/09
I am sorry I got disconnected there ! Well like I said from the very start,
if you want to test Andre's skills , always refer to the period when he
was in his pirme which was the late sixties to the early seventies ! If
you are going to use the time period of Andre after 1985 , your just
being plain Biased ! Because Unlike other normal Athletes Andre was living
with a death sentence by 1986 . He was Deppressed , he was drinking heavily,
he had all these surgeries . It's like what all the other great wrestlers like
Hogan , Rick Flair had always stated earlier ; " The only way you could beat
Andre was if he Let you " This chicken MMA fighter Akira wouldn't even go
near an old Andre even when he agreed . Shame on you MMA fighters !
Kind regards
Mamun
I am sorry I got disconnected there ! Well like I said from the very start,
if you want to test Andre's skills , always refer to the period when he
was in his pirme which was the late sixties to the early seventies ! If
you are going to use the time period of Andre after 1985 , your just
being plain Biased ! Because Unlike other normal Athletes Andre was living
with a death sentence by 1986 . He was Deppressed , he was drinking heavily,
he had all these surgeries . It's like what all the other great wrestlers like
Hogan , Rick Flair had always stated earlier ; " The only way you could beat
Andre was if he Let you " This chicken MMA fighter Akira wouldn't even go
near an old Andre even when he agreed . Shame on you MMA fighters !
Kind regards
Mamun
MAMUN said on 13/May/09
Well my friend " The Ben " I have a lot to say and don't know where to start?
I will start off by saying that that your last post with the so called info
was a last nail in the coffin for the case you are trying to make here !
If you ever read any of Andre's Bio or did the research , you will find
out that Andre was born with a condition called Acromegaly . Yes , it's a
condition that makes you grow faster and to Gigantic proportions . It also
makes you age faster as well . Andre was told by his doctors aged 12 that
he had already lived half of his life and seeing his 4o th birthday was a
very big gamble ! In other words Andre was sentenced to death when he was
only 12 years old and the sentence was to be carried out any time after the
age of thirty ! Also another very important fact, Andre wasn't aging like
normal people ! He was aging really fast ! Andre's internal organs when
he was forty wasn't the same as that of a normal forty year old ! He was
actually lving with the internal organs of an eighty year old according
to his doctors by the age of forty .
Here is your problem my freind " The Ben " . What was the date of that match
again ? April 29th 1986 ! Andre was born May 19 1946 ! Yes he was already
forty years old ( The age his doctors told him that he may never see ) ,He
was aging fast and in serious back pain ! It's a very big shame for your
so called MMA fighter Akira Maeda not to be able to knock-down an aging
Andre even after the fight was for real and still was afraid to come near the
giant when he agreed to be pined . Inoki understood why Akira turned chicken
and was the reason he had to stop the fight ! And this article seemed to be
reported by some dude who was biased against wresling and Andre !
My friend the point I am trying to make here is If a young man like me
knocked -out a 77 year old Frank Mir , will any body respct me ? No !
Will any body respect me if I ran away from a 77 year old Frank Mir ?
No ! Akira could
Well my friend " The Ben " I have a lot to say and don't know where to start?
I will start off by saying that that your last post with the so called info
was a last nail in the coffin for the case you are trying to make here !
If you ever read any of Andre's Bio or did the research , you will find
out that Andre was born with a condition called Acromegaly . Yes , it's a
condition that makes you grow faster and to Gigantic proportions . It also
makes you age faster as well . Andre was told by his doctors aged 12 that
he had already lived half of his life and seeing his 4o th birthday was a
very big gamble ! In other words Andre was sentenced to death when he was
only 12 years old and the sentence was to be carried out any time after the
age of thirty ! Also another very important fact, Andre wasn't aging like
normal people ! He was aging really fast ! Andre's internal organs when
he was forty wasn't the same as that of a normal forty year old ! He was
actually lving with the internal organs of an eighty year old according
to his doctors by the age of forty .
Here is your problem my freind " The Ben " . What was the date of that match
again ? April 29th 1986 ! Andre was born May 19 1946 ! Yes he was already
forty years old ( The age his doctors told him that he may never see ) ,He
was aging fast and in serious back pain ! It's a very big shame for your
so called MMA fighter Akira Maeda not to be able to knock-down an aging
Andre even after the fight was for real and still was afraid to come near the
giant when he agreed to be pined . Inoki understood why Akira turned chicken
and was the reason he had to stop the fight ! And this article seemed to be
reported by some dude who was biased against wresling and Andre !
My friend the point I am trying to make here is If a young man like me
knocked -out a 77 year old Frank Mir , will any body respct me ? No !
Will any body respect me if I ran away from a 77 year old Frank Mir ?
No ! Akira could
Da Man said on 13/May/09
The Ben, I think everyone here realizes wrestling is SCRIPTED. I also think everyone here realizes that in an MMA setting, a trained MMA fighter would pick apart virtually any professional wrestler assuming the size disparity isn't insurmountable. But a bar fight isn't an MMA setting, and no matter how trained, a good bare-knuckle shot from someone like Kane will drop just about anyone in the MMA world, no matter how trained.
For example, I'm sure a trained MMA fighter would more often than not submit or KO someone trained in Krav Maga in an MMA setting. But out on the battle field, or a bar room fight, in a real world encounter my money would be on the guy trained in Krav Maga every time.
Standard MMA fighter are most effective in the octagon with basic rules, that's how they train, this also means that MMA fighters are not the deadliest guys around, much less unbeatable outside of the octagon.
The Ben, I think everyone here realizes wrestling is SCRIPTED. I also think everyone here realizes that in an MMA setting, a trained MMA fighter would pick apart virtually any professional wrestler assuming the size disparity isn't insurmountable. But a bar fight isn't an MMA setting, and no matter how trained, a good bare-knuckle shot from someone like Kane will drop just about anyone in the MMA world, no matter how trained.
For example, I'm sure a trained MMA fighter would more often than not submit or KO someone trained in Krav Maga in an MMA setting. But out on the battle field, or a bar room fight, in a real world encounter my money would be on the guy trained in Krav Maga every time.
Standard MMA fighter are most effective in the octagon with basic rules, that's how they train, this also means that MMA fighters are not the deadliest guys around, much less unbeatable outside of the octagon.
Da Man said on 13/May/09
Yaspaa, the problem is we have Kane's college coach saying he personally spotted Kane when he broke the 500 lb bench. We have Mick Foley saying in his autobiography that he watched Kane do sets on the bench with 405 lbs. We have Kane himself claiming 535 lbs. And we even have Dave Meltzer confirming Kane's strength in the gym, and that guy is prone to downgrading wrestlers more so than building their "legend". This has all been verified through legit sources, not just celebheights hearsay.
I doubt Kane is benching 500+ lbs today (you never know), but this guy used to be a real beast:
Click Here
Click Here
Yaspaa, the problem is we have Kane's college coach saying he personally spotted Kane when he broke the 500 lb bench. We have Mick Foley saying in his autobiography that he watched Kane do sets on the bench with 405 lbs. We have Kane himself claiming 535 lbs. And we even have Dave Meltzer confirming Kane's strength in the gym, and that guy is prone to downgrading wrestlers more so than building their "legend". This has all been verified through legit sources, not just celebheights hearsay.
I doubt Kane is benching 500+ lbs today (you never know), but this guy used to be a real beast:
Click Here
Click Here
Anonymous said on 13/May/09
Anonymous says on 12/May/09
if Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal were in WWE, they would be WWE and World Heavyweight champion for life. Bring on Kane, Undertaker, Batista, Triple H, Big Show, Khali, whoever, those two 8th degree black belts in karate would take them all down.
Seagal is not an 8th degree in Karate. If you want to be taken seriously, at least get the disciple right. Seagal is a master in the art of AIKIDO, which has NOTHING to do with the OFFENSIVE art of Karate. Your credibility is SHOT.
Anonymous says on 12/May/09
if Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal were in WWE, they would be WWE and World Heavyweight champion for life. Bring on Kane, Undertaker, Batista, Triple H, Big Show, Khali, whoever, those two 8th degree black belts in karate would take them all down.
Seagal is not an 8th degree in Karate. If you want to be taken seriously, at least get the disciple right. Seagal is a master in the art of AIKIDO, which has NOTHING to do with the OFFENSIVE art of Karate. Your credibility is SHOT.
Yaspaa said on 13/May/09
I can see why you are anonymous. Brock Lesnar and Bob Sapp,two MMA powerhouses. I don't believe Kane's bench press either his arms are too long and I've never seen anyone less suited to shootfighting. Big and strong but slow,it's speed that kills.
I can see why you are anonymous. Brock Lesnar and Bob Sapp,two MMA powerhouses. I don't believe Kane's bench press either his arms are too long and I've never seen anyone less suited to shootfighting. Big and strong but slow,it's speed that kills.
The Ben said on 13/May/09
Mamun
Andre had no skill...not massive strength...all he had was size and i disease that meant he was never that quick... look at the oldest video you can find.. he was never fast... he was as fast as an average guy and nothing more..
Andre skills were 1 Drinking. 2 having many teeth. 3 speaking bad english....
Mamun
Andre had no skill...not massive strength...all he had was size and i disease that meant he was never that quick... look at the oldest video you can find.. he was never fast... he was as fast as an average guy and nothing more..
Andre skills were 1 Drinking. 2 having many teeth. 3 speaking bad english....
The Ben said on 13/May/09
Click Here
MAMUN
The link above regards the worked wrestling fight that turned into a shoot between 5'11 220 lb Akira Maeda and 7ft 500lb andre the giant... its real. it happened and andre got his ass kicked and ran away.. Inoki was the champion of nothing..he was a pro wrestler who conned the world (including you) into believing he was the world kung fu champion... is there even such a thing?
You do some great and respectfull posts on mere Mamun but wrestlers are not real fighters... look at boxers, kick boxers. K1 fighters, mma fighters, amature wrestlers..... pro wrestling is fake... if you argued that a youg kurt angle with correct training could have been one of the best i would agree....But andre?...
Click Here
MAMUN
The link above regards the worked wrestling fight that turned into a shoot between 5'11 220 lb Akira Maeda and 7ft 500lb andre the giant... its real. it happened and andre got his ass kicked and ran away.. Inoki was the champion of nothing..he was a pro wrestler who conned the world (including you) into believing he was the world kung fu champion... is there even such a thing?
You do some great and respectfull posts on mere Mamun but wrestlers are not real fighters... look at boxers, kick boxers. K1 fighters, mma fighters, amature wrestlers..... pro wrestling is fake... if you argued that a youg kurt angle with correct training could have been one of the best i would agree....But andre?...
sid said on 13/May/09
Anonymous Your a joke, Kane would crush Chuck norris, chuck norris is 70, he doesn't have power, still has health.. Kane would just block his kicks and punches, and pick norris up without any help and slam him on the ground, chuck wouldnt be getting up..Big show wouldnt feel a thing.
Anonymous Your a joke, Kane would crush Chuck norris, chuck norris is 70, he doesn't have power, still has health.. Kane would just block his kicks and punches, and pick norris up without any help and slam him on the ground, chuck wouldnt be getting up..Big show wouldnt feel a thing.
Anonymous said on 12/May/09
if Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal were in WWE, they would be WWE and World Heavyweight champion for life. Bring on Kane, Undertaker, Batista, Triple H, Big Show, Khali, whoever, those two 8th degree black belts in karate would take them all down.
if Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal were in WWE, they would be WWE and World Heavyweight champion for life. Bring on Kane, Undertaker, Batista, Triple H, Big Show, Khali, whoever, those two 8th degree black belts in karate would take them all down.
sid said on 12/May/09
Da Man The Ben doesn't know diddly squat, he is just a assumer, he knows nothing about fighting, he's a just a kid, Kane said on his radio show as himself Glenn Jacobs he is anti drug...Kane always looked natural, a person of kane's size will have natural strength.. they don't need to take roids..Even in college his coach talked about in a good way, saying he is a smart student, hell of a athelit..His coach said he was there when jacobs broke the 500 pound barrier of bench press which was 525...The when he gotten older which was in the wwe his strenth increased.. to 535, probably still doing that.. Kane will out power anyone.. Kane is 320.. no one that big in the UFC biggest you can get is 260..kane is well north of that..If kane punches someone with his power, he will break your jaw and knock you out.. kane is no small man.. he has strength.. The Ben doesn't know what the hell he is saying.. again like I said he is a kid..
Da Man The Ben doesn't know diddly squat, he is just a assumer, he knows nothing about fighting, he's a just a kid, Kane said on his radio show as himself Glenn Jacobs he is anti drug...Kane always looked natural, a person of kane's size will have natural strength.. they don't need to take roids..Even in college his coach talked about in a good way, saying he is a smart student, hell of a athelit..His coach said he was there when jacobs broke the 500 pound barrier of bench press which was 525...The when he gotten older which was in the wwe his strenth increased.. to 535, probably still doing that.. Kane will out power anyone.. Kane is 320.. no one that big in the UFC biggest you can get is 260..kane is well north of that..If kane punches someone with his power, he will break your jaw and knock you out.. kane is no small man.. he has strength.. The Ben doesn't know what the hell he is saying.. again like I said he is a kid..
sid said on 12/May/09
The Ben Kane is way stronger then any ufc fighter, and MMA, Glenn jacobs on his radio show, said he is anit drug, so no kane never used roids.. ufc fighters mma fighters dont train for strength like kane does.. kane will out power any ufc fight since mamum said he can bench 535. Kane Glenn jacobs shall I say, there was his coach.. who was there and saw jacobs broke the 500 pounds bench press mark, which was 525, now mamum was saying kane benches 535, older you get stronger, i notice that to, im benching 490...i wasnt doing that in highschool, you usually peak your strength at 35, im 39 turning 40, kane is 42 still quite young.. kane has lots of strength and energy. I didn't say kane can take out anybody, kane can out power them with his powers, 150 pound mma fight would not faze kane...differnt weight class...i should know i am fighter.. you fight somoene 50 to 70 pounds then you, your gonna lose..i seen that happen pal you can't say anything when you dont have experience
The Ben Kane is way stronger then any ufc fighter, and MMA, Glenn jacobs on his radio show, said he is anit drug, so no kane never used roids.. ufc fighters mma fighters dont train for strength like kane does.. kane will out power any ufc fight since mamum said he can bench 535. Kane Glenn jacobs shall I say, there was his coach.. who was there and saw jacobs broke the 500 pounds bench press mark, which was 525, now mamum was saying kane benches 535, older you get stronger, i notice that to, im benching 490...i wasnt doing that in highschool, you usually peak your strength at 35, im 39 turning 40, kane is 42 still quite young.. kane has lots of strength and energy. I didn't say kane can take out anybody, kane can out power them with his powers, 150 pound mma fight would not faze kane...differnt weight class...i should know i am fighter.. you fight somoene 50 to 70 pounds then you, your gonna lose..i seen that happen pal you can't say anything when you dont have experience
MAMUN said on 12/May/09
The Ben , if you look at Andre's fight with Inoki in 1976 , you will see that
not one MMA fighter in the world would ever stand a chance against a young
and prime Andre . Don't forget that Inoki was also the world's Kung Fu and
martial arts champion at the time and all he was doing during the match with
Andre was keeping his distance ! His flying kicks seemed to have very little
effect on the giant who was also unbeleivably superfast for someone his size!
Size , Strength and wrestling skills ultimately put Andre the King of fighting! And if you are going to use examples of Andre , please don't
waste your time by showing us clips of a dying Andre during the late 80's
or early 90 's . I know most people over here who would love to put Andre
down constantly bring up Andre of that time frame only ! Never do they bring
up Andre when he was in his prime like the early 70's .
Regards
Mamun
The Ben , if you look at Andre's fight with Inoki in 1976 , you will see that
not one MMA fighter in the world would ever stand a chance against a young
and prime Andre . Don't forget that Inoki was also the world's Kung Fu and
martial arts champion at the time and all he was doing during the match with
Andre was keeping his distance ! His flying kicks seemed to have very little
effect on the giant who was also unbeleivably superfast for someone his size!
Size , Strength and wrestling skills ultimately put Andre the King of fighting! And if you are going to use examples of Andre , please don't
waste your time by showing us clips of a dying Andre during the late 80's
or early 90 's . I know most people over here who would love to put Andre
down constantly bring up Andre of that time frame only ! Never do they bring
up Andre when he was in his prime like the early 70's .
Regards
Mamun
Da Man said on 12/May/09
The Ben, Kane benched more than 500 lbs. in college, I seriously doubt he was a "long term" steroid user at that point. In fact, I'm not convinced he was a long term steroid user at any point. Kane's build always looked more natural than some of his fellow professional wrestlers, IMO. He always looked like a big strong, corn-fed type of guy, a naturally big endo-meso who spent a lot of time in the gym. Kane never looked like a ecto-meso juiced to within an inch of his life like some of these guys.
The Ben, Kane benched more than 500 lbs. in college, I seriously doubt he was a "long term" steroid user at that point. In fact, I'm not convinced he was a long term steroid user at any point. Kane's build always looked more natural than some of his fellow professional wrestlers, IMO. He always looked like a big strong, corn-fed type of guy, a naturally big endo-meso who spent a lot of time in the gym. Kane never looked like a ecto-meso juiced to within an inch of his life like some of these guys.
MAMUN said on 12/May/09
Oh SID , I had personally asked Kane how much he benches and he said 535
pounds !!!!!!!
Regards
Mamun
Oh SID , I had personally asked Kane how much he benches and he said 535
pounds !!!!!!!
Regards
Mamun
MAMUN said on 12/May/09
Thank you sooo Much Big Show , SID and Da Man for your inshight in to this
matter . SID I agree to all that you wrote . When I was doing amature wrestling in high school at age 18 , I was only 180 pounds and just started
weight training . I used to wrestle even two boys aged 15 and 16 at the same
time who were only 130 to 150 pounds . No matter what kind of a submission
hold they would put on me , I would easily break out because of my bigger
size and strength . But When I used to put the headlock on them , they would
simply cry for mama ! What I am trying to say is , if you are only 200 pounds,
then no matter what fighting skill you have , when you take down somebody like
kane , You are not going to have him down for a long time !
Back to the strength of Andre , I was watching some very old wrestling clips
from u tube of Andre and Hogan dated as early as 1978 and Andre and Inoki
dated as early as 1976 !Oh my GOD , in those videos it almost seemed like
if Andre wanted to tear a then super prime Hogan into pieces , There was
nothing stoping him . And the match between Inoki looked like a 30 year old
wrestling an 11 year old . Every single WWF superstars who stood and fought
Andre like , Gorilla Monsoon, Rick Flair , Hogan , Bret Hart and so on , all
say the same thing ; The only way to beat Andre is if he lets you !!!!!!!!!
By the way today 12th May 2009 is the day Supermun was born !
Kind regartds to you all and thanks for the support !
Supermun
Thank you sooo Much Big Show , SID and Da Man for your inshight in to this
matter . SID I agree to all that you wrote . When I was doing amature wrestling in high school at age 18 , I was only 180 pounds and just started
weight training . I used to wrestle even two boys aged 15 and 16 at the same
time who were only 130 to 150 pounds . No matter what kind of a submission
hold they would put on me , I would easily break out because of my bigger
size and strength . But When I used to put the headlock on them , they would
simply cry for mama ! What I am trying to say is , if you are only 200 pounds,
then no matter what fighting skill you have , when you take down somebody like
kane , You are not going to have him down for a long time !
Back to the strength of Andre , I was watching some very old wrestling clips
from u tube of Andre and Hogan dated as early as 1978 and Andre and Inoki
dated as early as 1976 !Oh my GOD , in those videos it almost seemed like
if Andre wanted to tear a then super prime Hogan into pieces , There was
nothing stoping him . And the match between Inoki looked like a 30 year old
wrestling an 11 year old . Every single WWF superstars who stood and fought
Andre like , Gorilla Monsoon, Rick Flair , Hogan , Bret Hart and so on , all
say the same thing ; The only way to beat Andre is if he lets you !!!!!!!!!
By the way today 12th May 2009 is the day Supermun was born !
Kind regartds to you all and thanks for the support !
Supermun
The Ben said on 12/May/09
I seriously cant believe anyone is saying kane or andre could compare to any decent MMA fighter...its the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard!
I seriously cant believe anyone is saying kane or andre could compare to any decent MMA fighter...its the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard!
The Ben said on 12/May/09
Danimal on Kane
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
What happened?
Warrior ran into andre for a clothesline and andre held his fist up at the last minute.
Warrior was an athlete compared to broken down giant and im sure if the warrior wanted he could have kicked andres ass...
Danimal on Kane
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
What happened?
Warrior ran into andre for a clothesline and andre held his fist up at the last minute.
Warrior was an athlete compared to broken down giant and im sure if the warrior wanted he could have kicked andres ass...
The Ben said on 12/May/09
Sid..
You are a funny funny man.... Kane in ufc, ha ha ha... Kane is probably a long term steroid user... i know there are plenty in ufc who have used at one time or another but kane probably used for well over a decade, stopping around 2003... Kanes strength can be attributed to this.
im pretty sure Lesnar is as strong, maybe stronger then kane..Yeah i know lesnar was a user as well but not for the duration that kane did.
Sid..
You are a funny funny man.... Kane in ufc, ha ha ha... Kane is probably a long term steroid user... i know there are plenty in ufc who have used at one time or another but kane probably used for well over a decade, stopping around 2003... Kanes strength can be attributed to this.
im pretty sure Lesnar is as strong, maybe stronger then kane..Yeah i know lesnar was a user as well but not for the duration that kane did.
JT said on 12/May/09
Sid says on 11/May/09
Big Show Kane looks 3 inches shorter then big show... not 4. kane 6'9 in ring gear, 6'8 bare.
Click Here Easily 4 inches, if not more, considering the size of Big Show's forehead.
Sid says on 11/May/09
Big Show Kane looks 3 inches shorter then big show... not 4. kane 6'9 in ring gear, 6'8 bare.
Click Here Easily 4 inches, if not more, considering the size of Big Show's forehead.
sid said on 12/May/09
MAMUN big show Kane is stronger then any MMA UFC by a mile. Ufc MMA fighters don't train for strength. like kane would do.. kane has MMA experience in japan.. he did shoot fighting. Reguardless what, strong handshake or not. Kane threw a punch with his strength. he will actually break you jaw and knock you out. or perhaps kill you.. his hands are huge. he is benching. over 500 pounds.. Kane would out power and ufc MMA with his sheer strength.. he can body slam, you without you helping him. i seen him slam a 200 pound man with one arm... once back meets ground on a ufc style mat, your not getting back up...Kane will just out strength anyone in the ufc, ufc doesn't train for mass 500 pounds. they train for speed..power in there own level..and stamina...i should know i used to fight..Kane can take big show and randy orton. cause he has shoot experience.. kane picked big show without show helping him..threw him out of the ring..that was cslled sheer strength
MAMUN big show Kane is stronger then any MMA UFC by a mile. Ufc MMA fighters don't train for strength. like kane would do.. kane has MMA experience in japan.. he did shoot fighting. Reguardless what, strong handshake or not. Kane threw a punch with his strength. he will actually break you jaw and knock you out. or perhaps kill you.. his hands are huge. he is benching. over 500 pounds.. Kane would out power and ufc MMA with his sheer strength.. he can body slam, you without you helping him. i seen him slam a 200 pound man with one arm... once back meets ground on a ufc style mat, your not getting back up...Kane will just out strength anyone in the ufc, ufc doesn't train for mass 500 pounds. they train for speed..power in there own level..and stamina...i should know i used to fight..Kane can take big show and randy orton. cause he has shoot experience.. kane picked big show without show helping him..threw him out of the ring..that was cslled sheer strength
Big Show said on 12/May/09
Danimal says on 11/May/09
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
What happened?
I have a video where Bobby Heenan talks about Warrior always being a little bit too enthousiastic when trying to get Andre off his feet by giving him a shoulder-block. Off course Andre wouldn't botch and according to Heenan Andre only growled a little bit. One day however, when Warrior again came running towards him with 20 miles an hour, in stead of just standing still Andre extended his fist and Warrior walked right into it, knocking him to the ground. After that Warrior was a little bit more careful when wrestling Andre.
Danimal says on 11/May/09
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
What happened?
I have a video where Bobby Heenan talks about Warrior always being a little bit too enthousiastic when trying to get Andre off his feet by giving him a shoulder-block. Off course Andre wouldn't botch and according to Heenan Andre only growled a little bit. One day however, when Warrior again came running towards him with 20 miles an hour, in stead of just standing still Andre extended his fist and Warrior walked right into it, knocking him to the ground. After that Warrior was a little bit more careful when wrestling Andre.
sid said on 12/May/09
MAMUN I used to fight in the ring. as thai boxer, heavy weight...I'm a heavy weight. I fought a guy.. for sparring full contact agaist a 150 pound fighter...he was was out matched by me..i was stonger.. differnt weight class...your not gonna prevail. if your a 150 pound man.. fighting a guy like me who is 24o....he was out boxed. and out strengths.. he kept falling from my punches..Kane would def break your jaw. and know your out.. his hands are huge.. he is one of the strongest...He benches over 500.. cause his coach.. said.. he was when Glenn broke the 500 pounds bench press.. which was 525. kane is one of the strongest..still.
MAMUN I used to fight in the ring. as thai boxer, heavy weight...I'm a heavy weight. I fought a guy.. for sparring full contact agaist a 150 pound fighter...he was was out matched by me..i was stonger.. differnt weight class...your not gonna prevail. if your a 150 pound man.. fighting a guy like me who is 24o....he was out boxed. and out strengths.. he kept falling from my punches..Kane would def break your jaw. and know your out.. his hands are huge.. he is one of the strongest...He benches over 500.. cause his coach.. said.. he was when Glenn broke the 500 pounds bench press.. which was 525. kane is one of the strongest..still.
Da Man said on 11/May/09
Pepper says on 11/May/09
"hahahhaha check out ... fedor vs Schilt, both those guys are taller than Kane and have way more experience,but still lost."
I'm not sure Schilt is really any taller than Kane, but he is notably smaller/lighter than Kane is.
Supposed 6'11.5" Schilt and 6'3" (MMA billed) Jerome Le Banner: Click Here
Click Here
Supposed 6'11.5" Schilt and 6'7.5" (MMA billed) Bjorn Breggy: Click Here
Supposed 6'11.5" Schilt and 5'9" max Jason Statham: Click Here
You have to realize that Kane, in addition to being a roughly 6'8", 320+ lb. muscular guy is also naturally athletic. He set college basketball records and he would have been drafted by the NFL if not for a knee injury.
Just because wrestling is scripted doesn't mean these guys aren't real athletes. There are a lot of outstanding athletes in the WWE, Kane and Taker being among them.
Besides, Fedor isn't Tim Sylvia and a bar fight doesn't have MMA rules.
Pepper says on 11/May/09
"hahahhaha check out ... fedor vs Schilt, both those guys are taller than Kane and have way more experience,but still lost."
I'm not sure Schilt is really any taller than Kane, but he is notably smaller/lighter than Kane is.
Supposed 6'11.5" Schilt and 6'3" (MMA billed) Jerome Le Banner: Click Here
Click Here
Supposed 6'11.5" Schilt and 6'7.5" (MMA billed) Bjorn Breggy: Click Here
Supposed 6'11.5" Schilt and 5'9" max Jason Statham: Click Here
You have to realize that Kane, in addition to being a roughly 6'8", 320+ lb. muscular guy is also naturally athletic. He set college basketball records and he would have been drafted by the NFL if not for a knee injury.
Just because wrestling is scripted doesn't mean these guys aren't real athletes. There are a lot of outstanding athletes in the WWE, Kane and Taker being among them.
Besides, Fedor isn't Tim Sylvia and a bar fight doesn't have MMA rules.
Danimal said on 11/May/09
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
What happened?
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
What happened?
Big Show said on 11/May/09
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
Or ask Akira Maeda. His match with Andre turned in a shoot match (not unusual as most of Maeda's matches turned into shoots). He was kicking Andre for like 15 minutes yet at the end Andre was still standing. And Maeda didn't dare to go near him. Only kicking and backing off was his strategy, and it didn't work.
Red says on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
Or ask Akira Maeda. His match with Andre turned in a shoot match (not unusual as most of Maeda's matches turned into shoots). He was kicking Andre for like 15 minutes yet at the end Andre was still standing. And Maeda didn't dare to go near him. Only kicking and backing off was his strategy, and it didn't work.
Pepper said on 11/May/09
SO in fact you say fedor would lose to kane? and dude common shaking hands and throwing a proper punch arent the same. Check out bob sapp for example. I dunno what kind of fighting experience you have but a guys handshake doesnt matter
SO in fact you say fedor would lose to kane? and dude common shaking hands and throwing a proper punch arent the same. Check out bob sapp for example. I dunno what kind of fighting experience you have but a guys handshake doesnt matter
MAMUN said on 11/May/09
To my friend pepper who say both of those fighters were taller than Kane
and were more experienced ? How do you know and what proof do you have ?
They certainly weren't as powerful and super fast at the same time as Kane!
Regards
Mamun
To my friend pepper who say both of those fighters were taller than Kane
and were more experienced ? How do you know and what proof do you have ?
They certainly weren't as powerful and super fast at the same time as Kane!
Regards
Mamun
MAMUN said on 11/May/09
My very good friend RED , What did happen ???????????? Please tell me because
now I won't be able to get good sleep !
Kind regards
Mamun
My very good friend RED , What did happen ???????????? Please tell me because
now I won't be able to get good sleep !
Kind regards
Mamun
MAMUN said on 11/May/09
Thank you sooo much my friends Big Show and Sid for understanding my point !
I Think most of you good people out there who are wrestling fans always come
accross critics of wrestling who say wrestling is nothing but fake !But I
face even worse !Most of my family members say wrestling is soo fake that
if you train an 11 year girl the right fake moves , she could get into the
ring with Kane any time ! In my culture we can't argue with the elders or
grown-ups very outrageously , but that last statement drives me over the
edge !
I want to tell them if wrestling is so fake and if were that easy to take
down UT or Kane , why don't you just jump into the ring against them and
prove your point ? How do you lift a 345 pounds Kane and Bodyslam him if
you are not strong enough ? If any of you good posters have experience in
fighting , you could actually tell how powerful a fighters punch might be
by shaking his hands . Boy , when I shock Kane's Massive hands , I got the
message alright ! And My frind SID , If Kane did punch my friends hard enough,
he would most likely even put them to an everlasting sleep !
Kind regards
Supermun
Thank you sooo much my friends Big Show and Sid for understanding my point !
I Think most of you good people out there who are wrestling fans always come
accross critics of wrestling who say wrestling is nothing but fake !But I
face even worse !Most of my family members say wrestling is soo fake that
if you train an 11 year girl the right fake moves , she could get into the
ring with Kane any time ! In my culture we can't argue with the elders or
grown-ups very outrageously , but that last statement drives me over the
edge !
I want to tell them if wrestling is so fake and if were that easy to take
down UT or Kane , why don't you just jump into the ring against them and
prove your point ? How do you lift a 345 pounds Kane and Bodyslam him if
you are not strong enough ? If any of you good posters have experience in
fighting , you could actually tell how powerful a fighters punch might be
by shaking his hands . Boy , when I shock Kane's Massive hands , I got the
message alright ! And My frind SID , If Kane did punch my friends hard enough,
he would most likely even put them to an everlasting sleep !
Kind regards
Supermun
Red said on 11/May/09
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
Mamun, if somone think he would beat Andre the Giant, he should ask the Ultimate Warrior what happened when he angered Andre ;))
Red said on 11/May/09
Big Show says on 10/May/09
Red says on 10/May/09
Nothing to do with height, but...
Click Here
That story turned out to be a fake.
I think they turned it into that, it
Big Show says on 10/May/09
Red says on 10/May/09
Nothing to do with height, but...
Click Here
That story turned out to be a fake.
I think they turned it into that, it
Pepper said on 11/May/09
hahahhaha check out Fedor vs Choi or fedor vs Schilt, both those guys are taller than Kane and have way more experience,but still lost. On MMA rules they wouldn't stand a chance, you think they can defend against armbarms because of their size? Have you ever felt how a good lowkick feels? there are many examples of big guys who get completely owned by smaller ones, because the big ones simply cant fight. Try youtube for example.
hahahhaha check out Fedor vs Choi or fedor vs Schilt, both those guys are taller than Kane and have way more experience,but still lost. On MMA rules they wouldn't stand a chance, you think they can defend against armbarms because of their size? Have you ever felt how a good lowkick feels? there are many examples of big guys who get completely owned by smaller ones, because the big ones simply cant fight. Try youtube for example.
Big Show said on 11/May/09
Sid says on 11/May/09
MAMUN First of, kane is in a differnt weight class that does matter.. kane has what close to 200 pounds on your 150 pound friends..I hate MMA fighters there all cocky, I took out a MMA fighter cause I was bigger and stronger.. Maybe your friends can take out there own size people.. Kane is a super heavy weight.. he dwarfs your friends in size height and strength..you buddies wouldnt even faze kane with there punches or submissions.. kane would just out power them... size does matter... 150 pounds kid taking on kane I laugh at that.. kane has some mma experience in japan.. he knows how to shot. if kane punched your friends. they would be knocked out with a broken jaw.
Anyone who thinks he can take down 5 guys such as Kane, Triple H, Khali, Batista and Undertaker single-handedly is living in a fantasy-world. I don't even call that cockyness but ignorance. If you take the best MMA fighter and the best UFC fighter in the world and put them in a fight against these 5 men, I would definately put my money on Kane, Taker, Khali, Batista & Triple H.
Wrestling may not be real in terms of fighting, it doesn't change the fact that these wrestlers are huge men.
Sid says on 11/May/09
MAMUN First of, kane is in a differnt weight class that does matter.. kane has what close to 200 pounds on your 150 pound friends..I hate MMA fighters there all cocky, I took out a MMA fighter cause I was bigger and stronger.. Maybe your friends can take out there own size people.. Kane is a super heavy weight.. he dwarfs your friends in size height and strength..you buddies wouldnt even faze kane with there punches or submissions.. kane would just out power them... size does matter... 150 pounds kid taking on kane I laugh at that.. kane has some mma experience in japan.. he knows how to shot. if kane punched your friends. they would be knocked out with a broken jaw.
Anyone who thinks he can take down 5 guys such as Kane, Triple H, Khali, Batista and Undertaker single-handedly is living in a fantasy-world. I don't even call that cockyness but ignorance. If you take the best MMA fighter and the best UFC fighter in the world and put them in a fight against these 5 men, I would definately put my money on Kane, Taker, Khali, Batista & Triple H.
Wrestling may not be real in terms of fighting, it doesn't change the fact that these wrestlers are huge men.
Big Show said on 11/May/09
Sid says on 11/May/09
Big Show Kane looks 3 inches shorter then big show... not 4. kane 6'9 in ring gear, 6'8 bare.
Look at 1:13 and onwards when the camera angle is a little higher.
Click Here
If Big Show would lift his head up, Kane would only come up to Show's eyebrow, which I would say is around 4 inches.
Sid says on 11/May/09
Big Show Kane looks 3 inches shorter then big show... not 4. kane 6'9 in ring gear, 6'8 bare.
Look at 1:13 and onwards when the camera angle is a little higher.
Click Here
If Big Show would lift his head up, Kane would only come up to Show's eyebrow, which I would say is around 4 inches.
Sid said on 11/May/09
MAMUN First of, kane is in a differnt weight class that does matter.. kane has what close to 200 pounds on your 150 pound friends..I hate MMA fighters there all cocky, I took out a MMA fighter cause I was bigger and stronger.. Maybe your friends can take out there own size people.. Kane is a super heavy weight.. he dwarfs your friends in size height and strength..you buddies wouldnt even faze kane with there punches or submissions.. kane would just out power them... size does matter... 150 pounds kid taking on kane I laugh at that.. kane has some mma experience in japan.. he knows how to shot. if kane punched your friends. they would be knocked out with a broken jaw.
MAMUN First of, kane is in a differnt weight class that does matter.. kane has what close to 200 pounds on your 150 pound friends..I hate MMA fighters there all cocky, I took out a MMA fighter cause I was bigger and stronger.. Maybe your friends can take out there own size people.. Kane is a super heavy weight.. he dwarfs your friends in size height and strength..you buddies wouldnt even faze kane with there punches or submissions.. kane would just out power them... size does matter... 150 pounds kid taking on kane I laugh at that.. kane has some mma experience in japan.. he knows how to shot. if kane punched your friends. they would be knocked out with a broken jaw.
Sid said on 11/May/09
Big Show Kane looks 3 inches shorter then big show... not 4. kane 6'9 in ring gear, 6'8 bare.
Big Show Kane looks 3 inches shorter then big show... not 4. kane 6'9 in ring gear, 6'8 bare.
Sid said on 11/May/09
Whisper in the twist of swanton Kane is 6'8, to 6'8'5. kane never word 3 inch pads. you cant wrestle in them. i had 2 or 3 inche lifts, they where hard to walk in..I would advise what you say/
Whisper in the twist of swanton Kane is 6'8, to 6'8'5. kane never word 3 inch pads. you cant wrestle in them. i had 2 or 3 inche lifts, they where hard to walk in..I would advise what you say/
MAMUN said on 11/May/09
Thank you Cobra for your kind post !
Regards
Supermun
Thank you Cobra for your kind post !
Regards
Supermun
Cobra said on 10/May/09
Still, a kinda cool post, Mamun. Would love to meet Kane too. I have to go to a show before he retires. :)
He is one of my favorite wrestlers, maybe THE favorite, along with Kurt Angle.
Yeah, MMMA fanboys are somewhat annoying. And when Brock became UFC champ, it kinda ripped their heart out LOL.
Still, a kinda cool post, Mamun. Would love to meet Kane too. I have to go to a show before he retires. :)
He is one of my favorite wrestlers, maybe THE favorite, along with Kurt Angle.
Yeah, MMMA fanboys are somewhat annoying. And when Brock became UFC champ, it kinda ripped their heart out LOL.
Big Show said on 10/May/09
Whisper in the twist of swanton says on 10/May/09
Kane's real height is 6'10... In billed, he is 7 ft... but when he wore 3 pads of boots(in past), he was 7'1... When he wore pads, he looked same with big show when he stare Big Show down... But after he released his pads and mask, Big Show looks taller than him a little... But both of them billed 7 ft... Maybe because Show's head is bigger than Kane...
Kane's not 6'10 nor has he ever been. I'd say he's around 6'8-6'8.5 and when he was still in his original ring attire he wore some big ass shoes which probably gave him a 2-2.5" boost. Making him around 6'10-6'11 in ring attire. Big Show still had several inches on him during that period. But when Kane was wearing smaller footwear as before the height difference between him and Show became very clear (yet they still billed both of them at 7 feet).
Here's a segment from 2006 where Big Show looks at least 4 inches taller.
Click Here
Whisper in the twist of swanton says on 10/May/09
Kane's real height is 6'10... In billed, he is 7 ft... but when he wore 3 pads of boots(in past), he was 7'1... When he wore pads, he looked same with big show when he stare Big Show down... But after he released his pads and mask, Big Show looks taller than him a little... But both of them billed 7 ft... Maybe because Show's head is bigger than Kane...
Kane's not 6'10 nor has he ever been. I'd say he's around 6'8-6'8.5 and when he was still in his original ring attire he wore some big ass shoes which probably gave him a 2-2.5" boost. Making him around 6'10-6'11 in ring attire. Big Show still had several inches on him during that period. But when Kane was wearing smaller footwear as before the height difference between him and Show became very clear (yet they still billed both of them at 7 feet).
Here's a segment from 2006 where Big Show looks at least 4 inches taller.
Click Here
Big Show said on 10/May/09
Red says on 10/May/09
Nothing to do with height, but...
Click Here
That story turned out to be a fake. It was on the wrestling boards over a month ago. Neither man wasn't even in Detroit the night of the alleged bar fight.
Click Here
Red says on 10/May/09
Nothing to do with height, but...
Click Here
That story turned out to be a fake. It was on the wrestling boards over a month ago. Neither man wasn't even in Detroit the night of the alleged bar fight.
Click Here
MAMUN said on 10/May/09
Thank you sooo much my friend RED for that Info . I have become so sick and
tired about most people bragging how any UFC or MMA fighters ( even someone
as tiny as 90 pounds ) could easily knock -down Andre the Giant , Kane , SID
in less than one second . There were these guys in my gym who train for MMA
fighting and always bragg about how they would make someone like KANE cry
like a little girl . They tell me bring all five , Kane , UT, Batista ,Khali,
and Tripple H and it will only take one of them to destroy all five in a few
seconds . And they were all under 150 pounds . You know if they were not my
friends , I would have said how about me ? I would have asked them see if you
can take down me ?
It's no wonder when I had personally asked Kane if he was affraid of anyone
in a no rules hand to hand combat fight he said " NO " and he could bring
down anybody . Then fans fron the crowd yalled what about Big Show or Randy ?
He nodded his head and said " Very Easy " When I shook his hand , it was soo
powerful and I was asking my self " Oh my GOD " if this guy really were to
put a submission hold or a chock hold how on earth will someone like me live"?
RED you are the KING and you always bring proof to your ideas . Hail the KING!
Kind regards
Mamun
Thank you sooo much my friend RED for that Info . I have become so sick and
tired about most people bragging how any UFC or MMA fighters ( even someone
as tiny as 90 pounds ) could easily knock -down Andre the Giant , Kane , SID
in less than one second . There were these guys in my gym who train for MMA
fighting and always bragg about how they would make someone like KANE cry
like a little girl . They tell me bring all five , Kane , UT, Batista ,Khali,
and Tripple H and it will only take one of them to destroy all five in a few
seconds . And they were all under 150 pounds . You know if they were not my
friends , I would have said how about me ? I would have asked them see if you
can take down me ?
It's no wonder when I had personally asked Kane if he was affraid of anyone
in a no rules hand to hand combat fight he said " NO " and he could bring
down anybody . Then fans fron the crowd yalled what about Big Show or Randy ?
He nodded his head and said " Very Easy " When I shook his hand , it was soo
powerful and I was asking my self " Oh my GOD " if this guy really were to
put a submission hold or a chock hold how on earth will someone like me live"?
RED you are the KING and you always bring proof to your ideas . Hail the KING!
Kind regards
Mamun
Whisper in the twist of swanton said on 10/May/09
Kane's real height is 6'10... In billed, he is 7 ft... but when he wore 3 pads of boots(in past), he was 7'1... When he wore pads, he looked same with big show when he stare Big Show down... But after he released his pads and mask, Big Show looks taller than him a little... But both of them billed 7 ft... Maybe because Show's head is bigger than Kane...
Kane's real height is 6'10... In billed, he is 7 ft... but when he wore 3 pads of boots(in past), he was 7'1... When he wore pads, he looked same with big show when he stare Big Show down... But after he released his pads and mask, Big Show looks taller than him a little... But both of them billed 7 ft... Maybe because Show's head is bigger than Kane...
sid said on 8/May/09
TELLEM I think he meant 4'7
TELLEM I think he meant 4'7
TELLEM said on 7/May/09
7'4 king kong? or 4'7?
7'4 king kong? or 4'7?
sid said on 7/May/09
King Kong Load of crap, kane is probably bigger then you, 7'4 you hsve no proof
King Kong Load of crap, kane is probably bigger then you, 7'4 you hsve no proof
tony said on 6/May/09
wananother one have another one wnanother one have another one
wananother one have another one wnanother one have another one
sid said on 4/May/09
tony, i said he looks 6'9, didnt say he was, watch the whole video, its a hour long
tony, i said he looks 6'9, didnt say he was, watch the whole video, its a hour long
tony said on 3/May/09
sid but how can you estimate how tall he is there? you cant see his feet or cant see any object or human to compare heights with. if another unknown person was standing where he is you couldnt estimate if his 5'10 or 6'5 - is what i am trying to say
sid but how can you estimate how tall he is there? you cant see his feet or cant see any object or human to compare heights with. if another unknown person was standing where he is you couldnt estimate if his 5'10 or 6'5 - is what i am trying to say
sid said on 1/May/09
tony I said he looks it, didn't say i measured it, theres a diff, kane looked atleast 6'9 there, so barefeet 6'8 his shoes is probably 1 inch, dress shoes...estimation it's called Tony
tony I said he looks it, didn't say i measured it, theres a diff, kane looked atleast 6'9 there, so barefeet 6'8 his shoes is probably 1 inch, dress shoes...estimation it's called Tony
tony said on 1/May/09
Sid how can you possibly tell how tall kane is there??
theres no measurements or anything to compare with.
Sid how can you possibly tell how tall kane is there??
theres no measurements or anything to compare with.
sid said on 28/Apr/09
Heres a video of Glenn jacobs speaking at the libery forum last month.. he looks 6'9 there probably in shoes. I'd say 6'8 barefeet looks it to.here check the link Click Here
Heres a video of Glenn jacobs speaking at the libery forum last month.. he looks 6'9 there probably in shoes. I'd say 6'8 barefeet looks it to.here check the link Click Here
Shock of Electric said on 28/Apr/09
Click Here This is with the top rope adjusted to be straight across since that's the highest indicator of level for them. Kane and Taker are virtually identical height in their boots, where Kane has up to .5" advantage, like I've been saying all along. Even in the initial angle, he's still not enough taller to compensate for the boot difference to make him *taller* than Undertaker barefoot.
Click Here This is with the top rope adjusted to be straight across since that's the highest indicator of level for them. Kane and Taker are virtually identical height in their boots, where Kane has up to .5" advantage, like I've been saying all along. Even in the initial angle, he's still not enough taller to compensate for the boot difference to make him *taller* than Undertaker barefoot.
sid said on 22/Apr/09
Big Mike You ever met Kane, your just saying this with out any assumptions
Big Mike You ever met Kane, your just saying this with out any assumptions
Big Mike said on 21/Apr/09
kane is 6`7 my mom is 5ft 8 and im ha head taller then here and im 6`7 to
kane is 6`7 my mom is 5ft 8 and im ha head taller then here and im 6`7 to
Alex2 said on 21/Apr/09
I think it would be fair to upgrade Kane to 6'8" at least.
I think it would be fair to upgrade Kane to 6'8" at least.
hs2009 said on 15/Apr/09
Kane at 6'8.5" & Undertaker at 6'8" seems fair. Kane has a very slight height advantage over The Undertaker in spite of Taker's long forehead.
Kane at 6'8.5" & Undertaker at 6'8" seems fair. Kane has a very slight height advantage over The Undertaker in spite of Taker's long forehead.
Rantsrob said on 15/Apr/09
In the picture you can see Undertaker has a longer forehead. But kanes has a very odd head shape and his head kind of peaks higher. Compensated for Footwear idk but i cant see Taker being taller.
In the picture you can see Undertaker has a longer forehead. But kanes has a very odd head shape and his head kind of peaks higher. Compensated for Footwear idk but i cant see Taker being taller.
KingNick said on 15/Apr/09
Rantsrob says on 13/Apr/09
Click Here Unseen Taker Kane Staredown From about a week ago.
I'll admit Kane looks taller in that pic
Rantsrob says on 13/Apr/09
Click Here Unseen Taker Kane Staredown From about a week ago.
I'll admit Kane looks taller in that pic
Clay said on 14/Apr/09
Glen ''Kane'' Jacobs has said 6'8.5 many times. Which I could buy probably.
Glen ''Kane'' Jacobs has said 6'8.5 many times. Which I could buy probably.
Red said on 12/Apr/09
Sid, there
Sid, there
sid said on 12/Apr/09
Heres old masked kane vs old vicera, kane looked to have 3 inches on vic..kane is probably wearing 1'5 making him 6'9, vic at 6'6. without the internal lifts 2 inches Click Here
Heres old masked kane vs old vicera, kane looked to have 3 inches on vic..kane is probably wearing 1'5 making him 6'9, vic at 6'6. without the internal lifts 2 inches Click Here
Rantsrob said on 11/Apr/09
Undertaker is also closer to the camera if anyone has noticed.
Undertaker is also closer to the camera if anyone has noticed.
hs2009 said on 11/Apr/09
Kane is taller in those vids, marginally but he is.
I'd say Undertaker at 6'8" & Kane at 6'8.25" or thereabouts for peak heights.
Kane is taller in those vids, marginally but he is.
I'd say Undertaker at 6'8" & Kane at 6'8.25" or thereabouts for peak heights.
Da Man said on 11/Apr/09
In the 2nd pic I posted, if the blue line was a laser, Glen would lose a piece of his skull and Taker would lose hair.
In the 2nd pic I posted, if the blue line was a laser, Glen would lose a piece of his skull and Taker would lose hair.
Anonymous said on 11/Apr/09
All evidence points to Kane being the taller man in that video.
All evidence points to Kane being the taller man in that video.
sid said on 11/Apr/09
Da Man I agree, back then glenn was just a jobber so no lifts or his shoes had no heels...
Da Man I agree, back then glenn was just a jobber so no lifts or his shoes had no heels...
Shock of Electric said on 10/Apr/09
Top of Taker's head is level with the top of Glenn's hair. He's taller.
Top of Taker's head is level with the top of Glenn's hair. He's taller.
Da Man said on 10/Apr/09
Rob didn't post my last reply, oh well.
Taker is not taller at 5:22: Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
When you get a screen cap in which Taker has a notable posture advantage, only then do they come out virtually the same height: Click Here
Taker was not the taller man there and his posture was also quite good. Unlike "New Diesel", Taker had unbent knees, a straight neck and spine, chin up, and he was even shifting his weight to the balls of his feet here.
Rob didn't post my last reply, oh well.
Taker is not taller at 5:22: Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
When you get a screen cap in which Taker has a notable posture advantage, only then do they come out virtually the same height: Click Here
Taker was not the taller man there and his posture was also quite good. Unlike "New Diesel", Taker had unbent knees, a straight neck and spine, chin up, and he was even shifting his weight to the balls of his feet here.
Rantsrob said on 9/Apr/09
Paul says on 8/Apr/09
I have to laugh at this thread sometimes
I'm glad you get enjoyment.
Paul says on 8/Apr/09
I have to laugh at this thread sometimes
I'm glad you get enjoyment.
KingNick said on 9/Apr/09
They BOTH stand straight at the 5:22 mark.
They BOTH stand straight at the 5:22 mark.
sid said on 8/Apr/09
Shock of Electric actually no your wrong...Kane has 3 inches on mike knox kane looks taller to jbl then taker does..
Shock of Electric actually no your wrong...Kane has 3 inches on mike knox kane looks taller to jbl then taker does..
Big Show said on 8/Apr/09
Paul says on 8/Apr/09
I have to laugh at this thread sometimes
Me too, especially your remark on the 7th where you claim you can spot a 0.4" difference between Undertaker and Kane when the camera is 10 feet away from the action.
Paul says on 8/Apr/09
I have to laugh at this thread sometimes
Me too, especially your remark on the 7th where you claim you can spot a 0.4" difference between Undertaker and Kane when the camera is 10 feet away from the action.
Da Man said on 8/Apr/09
"Diesel" was always in motion, but Taker was standing tall. Straight spine, unbent knees, chin up, and he was even shifting his weight to the ball of his foot. Taker was not the taller man there:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
They're the same height only when you get a screen cap in which Taker has a notable posture advantage: Click Here
"Diesel" was always in motion, but Taker was standing tall. Straight spine, unbent knees, chin up, and he was even shifting his weight to the ball of his foot. Taker was not the taller man there:
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
They're the same height only when you get a screen cap in which Taker has a notable posture advantage: Click Here
Paul said on 8/Apr/09
I have to laugh at this thread sometimes
I have to laugh at this thread sometimes
Shock of Electric said on 8/Apr/09
Mike Knox I would put as high as 6'5.5" based on comparison with Richards if they are in even footwear as I see 4.5" there and Richards as I said from my own personal experience, no shorter than 6'1". In comparison with Kane, Knox is approximately 2.75" shorter by the direct comparison, but we do know Kane also has a .5" boot advantage on him, making Kane closer to 2.25" taller which also agrees with the difference with Big Ben, making Kane 6'7.75". That extra .5" in boots agrees with Kane and Taker being essentially the same height with a slight boot difference.
Using a similar comparison, the bottom line after boots difference between Taker and JBL is no less than 3". JBL at 6'5" even would leave Taker at a minimum 6'8" and honestly I believe JBL is 6'5.25". Another thing to point out, Taker is slightly more taller than JBL than Kane is compared to Big Ben, and JBL is slightly taller than Big Ben since he is "verified" 195cm and we've seen JBL as at least 6'5". I'm seeing .5" for Taker over Kane in cross reference aside from that same .5" we've seen from them in alike footwear that often gets ignored due all kinds of ifs buts and camera advantages.
Mike Knox I would put as high as 6'5.5" based on comparison with Richards if they are in even footwear as I see 4.5" there and Richards as I said from my own personal experience, no shorter than 6'1". In comparison with Kane, Knox is approximately 2.75" shorter by the direct comparison, but we do know Kane also has a .5" boot advantage on him, making Kane closer to 2.25" taller which also agrees with the difference with Big Ben, making Kane 6'7.75". That extra .5" in boots agrees with Kane and Taker being essentially the same height with a slight boot difference.
Using a similar comparison, the bottom line after boots difference between Taker and JBL is no less than 3". JBL at 6'5" even would leave Taker at a minimum 6'8" and honestly I believe JBL is 6'5.25". Another thing to point out, Taker is slightly more taller than JBL than Kane is compared to Big Ben, and JBL is slightly taller than Big Ben since he is "verified" 195cm and we've seen JBL as at least 6'5". I'm seeing .5" for Taker over Kane in cross reference aside from that same .5" we've seen from them in alike footwear that often gets ignored due all kinds of ifs buts and camera advantages.
chris said on 8/Apr/09
the reason why taker looks taller there is because his standing stiff upright while kane/diesel is standing loosely and slouched. IF they both had a face-off kane would look taller
the reason why taker looks taller there is because his standing stiff upright while kane/diesel is standing loosely and slouched. IF they both had a face-off kane would look taller
Eric 1 said on 7/Apr/09
Paul they are both always in motion and if anything at the end of the match when jacobs is holding taker for vader it looks like kane is taller.
Paul they are both always in motion and if anything at the end of the match when jacobs is holding taker for vader it looks like kane is taller.
James S said on 7/Apr/09
easily 6ft 7 and I would give him most of 6ft 8 aswell.
easily 6ft 7 and I would give him most of 6ft 8 aswell.
Rantsrob said on 7/Apr/09
Paul says on 7/Apr/09
Kane is not taller than UT...as you will see 05.20-05.22 if anthing UT is 1cm taller.
Click Here
The only thing that video proves is it is inconclusive whos taller.
Paul says on 7/Apr/09
Kane is not taller than UT...as you will see 05.20-05.22 if anthing UT is 1cm taller.
Click Here
The only thing that video proves is it is inconclusive whos taller.
KingNick said on 7/Apr/09
Paul says on 7/Apr/09
Kane is not taller than UT...as you will see 05.20-05.22 if anthing UT is 1cm taller.
Click Here
I've got to agree with Paul. If you cap it at 5:22 when both men are standing straight, UT is either slightly taller or they're the same height, it's hard to tell.
Paul says on 7/Apr/09
Kane is not taller than UT...as you will see 05.20-05.22 if anthing UT is 1cm taller.
Click Here
I've got to agree with Paul. If you cap it at 5:22 when both men are standing straight, UT is either slightly taller or they're the same height, it's hard to tell.
Paul said on 7/Apr/09
Kane is not taller than UT...as you will see 05.20-05.22 if anthing UT is 1cm taller.
Click Here
Kane is not taller than UT...as you will see 05.20-05.22 if anthing UT is 1cm taller.
Click Here
Rantsrob said on 6/Apr/09
knox looks atleast 6'5'' is steve richards is indeed 6'2''.
knox looks atleast 6'5'' is steve richards is indeed 6'2''.
Da Man said on 6/Apr/09
Kane and Taker's head sizes are close: Click Here (minor cam adv. for Kane) and Click Here (minor cam adv. for Taker)
It's obvious only when Taker's hair is dripping wet.
Here's Kane and Mike Knox, since he's been brought up recently: Click Here (posture advantage for Knox)
Kane and Taker's head sizes are close: Click Here (minor cam adv. for Kane) and Click Here (minor cam adv. for Taker)
It's obvious only when Taker's hair is dripping wet.
Here's Kane and Mike Knox, since he's been brought up recently: Click Here (posture advantage for Knox)
KingNick said on 4/Apr/09
sid says on 4/Apr/09
Heres Kane in street cloth going in a msg.. he looks legit 6'8 check it out
Click Here
The funny part about that is that Kane is BIGGER than his security guard lol.
sid says on 4/Apr/09
Heres Kane in street cloth going in a msg.. he looks legit 6'8 check it out
Click Here
The funny part about that is that Kane is BIGGER than his security guard lol.
Big Show said on 4/Apr/09
Click Here
Here's a match between Isaac Yankem and Jake 'The Snake' Roberts.
Click Here
Here's a match between Isaac Yankem and Jake 'The Snake' Roberts.
Big Show said on 4/Apr/09
Click Here
Here's a match between Isaac Yankem and Diesel from 1996. Not that it shows a good staredown, but it's probably the only televised one-on-one match these two ever had with one and other.
Click Here
Here's a match between Isaac Yankem and Diesel from 1996. Not that it shows a good staredown, but it's probably the only televised one-on-one match these two ever had with one and other.
sid said on 4/Apr/09
Heres Kane in street cloth going in a msg.. he looks legit 6'8 check it out
Click Here
Heres Kane in street cloth going in a msg.. he looks legit 6'8 check it out
Click Here
Rantsrob said on 3/Apr/09
Big King says on 31/Mar/09
He doesn't look 6'7.5" beside Mamun and Eric. I would estimate him at least 6'6".
Estimation. Fail.
Big King says on 31/Mar/09
He doesn't look 6'7.5" beside Mamun and Eric. I would estimate him at least 6'6".
Estimation. Fail.
sid said on 1/Apr/09
Hey I got a picture with Micheal Manna aka steveie richard and Glenn jacobs with a fan and others pics at the liberty forum. he looks 6'8 6'9 in shoes atleast
Click Here there all on the first row ones on the second with kelly kelly
Hey I got a picture with Micheal Manna aka steveie richard and Glenn jacobs with a fan and others pics at the liberty forum. he looks 6'8 6'9 in shoes atleast
Click Here there all on the first row ones on the second with kelly kelly
mike said on 1/Apr/09
ok i do agree now it is a 3 inch difference.
ok i do agree now it is a 3 inch difference.
sid said on 1/Apr/09
Big King Your a blind how can Kane look 6'6 when jbl is 6'5 kane has 3 inches on Jbl. kane is around 6'8 to 6'8'5 6'9 in boots give a take a little more..When I saw kane in feb he looked taller then my friend who is 6'6 by 2'25 inches or so..I got pictures from the event..outside not in ring gear in cloth
Big King Your a blind how can Kane look 6'6 when jbl is 6'5 kane has 3 inches on Jbl. kane is around 6'8 to 6'8'5 6'9 in boots give a take a little more..When I saw kane in feb he looked taller then my friend who is 6'6 by 2'25 inches or so..I got pictures from the event..outside not in ring gear in cloth
sid said on 1/Apr/09
I got pics to post from the event in vic. how do I post them
I got pics to post from the event in vic. how do I post them
Shock of Electric said on 1/Apr/09
nick, something to point out about your Big Show Kane Taker Khali comparison, Kane's head is taller than Taker's, which should be the other way around, so there's a discrepency in the comparison. Just an FYI, you should retry it.
Rantsrob, show me where you think the top of Undertaker's head is in the left side 2008 screencap. If it's any less than 35 pixels above the center of his eyes, it's wrong.
nick, something to point out about your Big Show Kane Taker Khali comparison, Kane's head is taller than Taker's, which should be the other way around, so there's a discrepency in the comparison. Just an FYI, you should retry it.
Rantsrob, show me where you think the top of Undertaker's head is in the left side 2008 screencap. If it's any less than 35 pixels above the center of his eyes, it's wrong.
Big King said on 31/Mar/09
He doesn't look 6'7.5" beside Mamun and Eric. I would estimate him at least 6'6".
He doesn't look 6'7.5" beside Mamun and Eric. I would estimate him at least 6'6".
Rantsrob said on 31/Mar/09
Im curious, Who do you guys think is taller, Jbl or Mike Knox. We have plenty of good comparisons with kane and mike knox with kane about 4in taller and we know jbl is atleast 6'5''. So what does everyone peg knox at?
Im curious, Who do you guys think is taller, Jbl or Mike Knox. We have plenty of good comparisons with kane and mike knox with kane about 4in taller and we know jbl is atleast 6'5''. So what does everyone peg knox at?
KingNick said on 31/Mar/09
JT and Shock of Electric, I'm going to borrow some photos from you guys.
My guess is when he debuted as Kane, depending on the footwear, he was 1" - 1.5" taller than UT (when UT was in wrestling boots also). Click Here and Click Here
IMO, whatever their actual heights are, nowadays I think Kane and UT are about 6'9" in their footwear, give or take .25" (even if the 6'9" guess is off I do believe currently their the same height in their footwear Click Here)
When Kane debuted, I think his boots brought him up to as high as 6'10". If he's 6'7.5" or 6'8" barefoot, that means his footwear at that time gave him a 2" - 2.5" boost Click Here and Click Here
Nowadays, I think his boots give him 1" - 1.5" boost Click Here and Click Here I see him as being 6'7.5" barefoot, 6'9" in boots. I'm open to him maybe being 6'8" but I don't believe he's taller than that barefoot.
JT and Shock of Electric, I'm going to borrow some photos from you guys.
My guess is when he debuted as Kane, depending on the footwear, he was 1" - 1.5" taller than UT (when UT was in wrestling boots also). Click Here and Click Here
IMO, whatever their actual heights are, nowadays I think Kane and UT are about 6'9" in their footwear, give or take .25" (even if the 6'9" guess is off I do believe currently their the same height in their footwear Click Here)
When Kane debuted, I think his boots brought him up to as high as 6'10". If he's 6'7.5" or 6'8" barefoot, that means his footwear at that time gave him a 2" - 2.5" boost Click Here and Click Here
Nowadays, I think his boots give him 1" - 1.5" boost Click Here and Click Here I see him as being 6'7.5" barefoot, 6'9" in boots. I'm open to him maybe being 6'8" but I don't believe he's taller than that barefoot.
sid said on 31/Mar/09
mike Your blind.. kane looks 3 inches shorter. kane 6'9 in ring gear. show 7ft in ring gear. 6'11 bear feet he has shrunk now. he was 7ft
mike Your blind.. kane looks 3 inches shorter. kane 6'9 in ring gear. show 7ft in ring gear. 6'11 bear feet he has shrunk now. he was 7ft
JT said on 30/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 29/Mar/09
James, Kane being .5" taller than Taker is not sensible at all, seeing as he isn't taller than him with a footwear advantage. - Click Here
With his big footwear, Kane was definitely at least one inch taller than Taker.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Even with the footwear advantage, IMO Kane is at least as tall as Taker, if not a shade taller. If you can prove that Kane also uses internal lifts, then who knows.
Shock of Electric says on 29/Mar/09
James, Kane being .5" taller than Taker is not sensible at all, seeing as he isn't taller than him with a footwear advantage. - Click Here
With his big footwear, Kane was definitely at least one inch taller than Taker.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Even with the footwear advantage, IMO Kane is at least as tall as Taker, if not a shade taller. If you can prove that Kane also uses internal lifts, then who knows.
nick said on 30/Mar/09
hey mike, not only does kane have a footwear advantage of about .75 the big show is still 3 inches taller i have a screen shot and accurate lines to show you.
Click Here
I threw in the taker khali comparison. This is assuming all are *in boots* and this time the Red line is 6'9. Kane comes to about 6'9.6 because he most likely has 1.75 inch footwear like usual. This makes kane around 6'7.75 barefoot. Taker is a hair over 6'9 in his boots making kane and taker around the same height barefoot. And the big show comes in at 7'0.6 with his slouch in boots, but hits 7'1 when standing straight as i projected fairly in his boots.
Kane is three inches shorter in the original photo even with the big shows slouch Click Here
And 3.6 inches taller if he stood straight in my comparison. Kane has about a half inch footwear advantage making kane 4 inches taller than kane barefoot. Click Here
In that staredown im not going to lie a man that is 6'7.5 -6'8 does everything to "apear" close in height to a 7 footer. You have a guy that has .5-.6 inch footwear advantage and the big show that slouches slightly giving another .5-.6 advantage makes it out to look like a short distance however if you add those up and in barefoot circumstances the difference is 4 inches like i projected
hey mike, not only does kane have a footwear advantage of about .75 the big show is still 3 inches taller i have a screen shot and accurate lines to show you.
Click Here
I threw in the taker khali comparison. This is assuming all are *in boots* and this time the Red line is 6'9. Kane comes to about 6'9.6 because he most likely has 1.75 inch footwear like usual. This makes kane around 6'7.75 barefoot. Taker is a hair over 6'9 in his boots making kane and taker around the same height barefoot. And the big show comes in at 7'0.6 with his slouch in boots, but hits 7'1 when standing straight as i projected fairly in his boots.
Kane is three inches shorter in the original photo even with the big shows slouch Click Here
And 3.6 inches taller if he stood straight in my comparison. Kane has about a half inch footwear advantage making kane 4 inches taller than kane barefoot. Click Here
In that staredown im not going to lie a man that is 6'7.5 -6'8 does everything to "apear" close in height to a 7 footer. You have a guy that has .5-.6 inch footwear advantage and the big show that slouches slightly giving another .5-.6 advantage makes it out to look like a short distance however if you add those up and in barefoot circumstances the difference is 4 inches like i projected
Rantsrob said on 30/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 29/Mar/09
James, Kane being .5" taller than Taker is not sensible at all, seeing as he isn't taller than him with a footwear advantage. - Click Here
Idk there shock, I just drew lines from tip of head to tip of head and kane came out taller mhmm...
Shock of Electric says on 29/Mar/09
James, Kane being .5" taller than Taker is not sensible at all, seeing as he isn't taller than him with a footwear advantage. - Click Here
Idk there shock, I just drew lines from tip of head to tip of head and kane came out taller mhmm...
mike said on 30/Mar/09
looks like kane in the above pic has a tad over a foot on him. i have no problem with 6'9" for kane ,of course maybe the shoes he has on give him a little more height like maybe an inch,so ok with that then ,barefoot we know kane has to be at least 6'7" or 6'8" tops. in the above pic he does look more like 6,9".
looks like kane in the above pic has a tad over a foot on him. i have no problem with 6'9" for kane ,of course maybe the shoes he has on give him a little more height like maybe an inch,so ok with that then ,barefoot we know kane has to be at least 6'7" or 6'8" tops. in the above pic he does look more like 6,9".
Cobra said on 30/Mar/09
I can`t follow the argumentation that Kane is "just" 6ft7,5.
He is billed 7ft and Glenn says when asked about his height 6ft8,5.
He also looks it most of the time. How can you come up with 6ft7,5 Rob?
I can`t follow the argumentation that Kane is "just" 6ft7,5.
He is billed 7ft and Glenn says when asked about his height 6ft8,5.
He also looks it most of the time. How can you come up with 6ft7,5 Rob?
mike said on 30/Mar/09
kane and big show face to face looks to be like a 2 inch difference bewtween the two after close observation. i put show at 6'11" and kane 6'9".
kane and big show face to face looks to be like a 2 inch difference bewtween the two after close observation. i put show at 6'11" and kane 6'9".
Shock of Electric said on 29/Mar/09
James, Kane being .5" taller than Taker is not sensible at all, seeing as he isn't taller than him with a footwear advantage. - Click Here
James, Kane being .5" taller than Taker is not sensible at all, seeing as he isn't taller than him with a footwear advantage. - Click Here
Rantsrob said on 29/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 29/Mar/09
Click Here this is a pic of the boot heel with measuring tape, and the 1/8" insert, which is squeezable down to about half that. As you can see there is a tiny little bit of heel above the more obvious top line which completes the 1.5". If you take out the insert, the bottom of the inside of the boot is solid, just like the material the heel is made of where's these parts connect to the material of the boot, otherwise the boot heel looks like 1.4375". There's nothing else, no hidden layer inbetween. The total increase in height is 1.5625", or complete heel + insert. Without the insert, it's exactly 1.5".
You have to much time on your hands.
Shock of Electric says on 29/Mar/09
Click Here this is a pic of the boot heel with measuring tape, and the 1/8" insert, which is squeezable down to about half that. As you can see there is a tiny little bit of heel above the more obvious top line which completes the 1.5". If you take out the insert, the bottom of the inside of the boot is solid, just like the material the heel is made of where's these parts connect to the material of the boot, otherwise the boot heel looks like 1.4375". There's nothing else, no hidden layer inbetween. The total increase in height is 1.5625", or complete heel + insert. Without the insert, it's exactly 1.5".
You have to much time on your hands.
Shock of Electric said on 29/Mar/09
Click Here this is a pic of the boot heel with measuring tape, and the 1/8" insert, which is squeezable down to about half that. As you can see there is a tiny little bit of heel above the more obvious top line which completes the 1.5". If you take out the insert, the bottom of the inside of the boot is solid, just like the material the heel is made of where's these parts connect to the material of the boot, otherwise the boot heel looks like 1.4375". There's nothing else, no hidden layer inbetween. The total increase in height is 1.5625", or complete heel + insert. Without the insert, it's exactly 1.5".
Click Here this is a pic of the boot heel with measuring tape, and the 1/8" insert, which is squeezable down to about half that. As you can see there is a tiny little bit of heel above the more obvious top line which completes the 1.5". If you take out the insert, the bottom of the inside of the boot is solid, just like the material the heel is made of where's these parts connect to the material of the boot, otherwise the boot heel looks like 1.4375". There's nothing else, no hidden layer inbetween. The total increase in height is 1.5625", or complete heel + insert. Without the insert, it's exactly 1.5".
James S said on 28/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 27/Mar/09
I say 6'7.75" for Kane, and 6'8.25" for full posture Undertaker.
Now speak sensibly, swap them round to 6 ft 7.75 Taker and 6 ft 8.25 Kane
Shock of Electric says on 27/Mar/09
I say 6'7.75" for Kane, and 6'8.25" for full posture Undertaker.
Now speak sensibly, swap them round to 6 ft 7.75 Taker and 6 ft 8.25 Kane
sid said on 28/Mar/09
Rantsrob Kane with the staredown witg big show. he had about 3 inches on kane. consider kane boots is a inch makes him in gear. without 6'8 that seems right
Rantsrob Kane with the staredown witg big show. he had about 3 inches on kane. consider kane boots is a inch makes him in gear. without 6'8 that seems right
sid said on 28/Mar/09
Rantsrob Your b's theres no kane nor Glenn jacobs on that site..just reg movie and music celbs. not wrestlers...
Rantsrob Your b's theres no kane nor Glenn jacobs on that site..just reg movie and music celbs. not wrestlers...
Da Man said on 28/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 26/Mar/09
"If I gain 1.5" from my wrestling boots that are 1.5" under my heel, how would you gain less than 1.5" from your Nike Shox if they are of similar design?"
Either your heel is thicker than 1.5", or you aren't getting 1.5".
Shock of Electric says on 26/Mar/09
"If I gain 1.5" from my wrestling boots that are 1.5" under my heel, how would you gain less than 1.5" from your Nike Shox if they are of similar design?"
Either your heel is thicker than 1.5", or you aren't getting 1.5".
Rantsrob said on 28/Mar/09
Click Here Heres a interesting site. Its probably not legit but it shows you the height difference between any heights. I put 6'8'' next to 5'11'' and it came out to what looked like exactly eric/kanes difference
Click Here Heres a interesting site. Its probably not legit but it shows you the height difference between any heights. I put 6'8'' next to 5'11'' and it came out to what looked like exactly eric/kanes difference
hs2009 said on 28/Mar/09
Thanks Eric & Rantsrob :D
I really do believe that Kane is legit 6'8". It's what he claims & what a guy who actually lived with him says he is.
Thanks Eric & Rantsrob :D
I really do believe that Kane is legit 6'8". It's what he claims & what a guy who actually lived with him says he is.
Rantsrob said on 27/Mar/09
Click Here Kane Bigshow staredown. I cant make stills but if someone can it be good.
Click Here Kane Undertaker backstage, taker closer to the camera.
Click Here Kane Bigshow staredown. I cant make stills but if someone can it be good.
Click Here Kane Undertaker backstage, taker closer to the camera.
Shock of Electric said on 27/Mar/09
I say 6'7.75" for Kane, and 6'8.25" for full posture Undertaker.
I say 6'7.75" for Kane, and 6'8.25" for full posture Undertaker.
Rantsrob said on 27/Mar/09
Nice find hs2009.
Nice find hs2009.
Eric 1 said on 27/Mar/09
Good find hs2009. A guy that roomed with kane even stated hes 6ft8 and back then 260 pounds. Same thing he tells people today. 6ft8.
Good find hs2009. A guy that roomed with kane even stated hes 6ft8 and back then 260 pounds. Same thing he tells people today. 6ft8.
Eric 1 said on 27/Mar/09
No matter which way you put it i would say 6ft8 for both taker and kane.
No matter which way you put it i would say 6ft8 for both taker and kane.
tuga said on 27/Mar/09
Rantsrob says on 26/Mar/09
So yankem was on his tip toes and taker was slouching putting kane around 6'5'' and taker about 6'9'' tuga?
Is that the best interpretation you can make?
I was expecting more from you.
Rantsrob says on 26/Mar/09
So yankem was on his tip toes and taker was slouching putting kane around 6'5'' and taker about 6'9'' tuga?
Is that the best interpretation you can make?
I was expecting more from you.
Shock of Electric said on 26/Mar/09
Sorry, forgot to edit the remainder of first paragraph because I realize it's no longer necessary to compare, obviously there's something different about wrestling boots and sneakers if I'm exactly as much taller in them as the heel provides.
Sorry, forgot to edit the remainder of first paragraph because I realize it's no longer necessary to compare, obviously there's something different about wrestling boots and sneakers if I'm exactly as much taller in them as the heel provides.
Shock of Electric said on 26/Mar/09
If I gain 1.5" from my wrestling boots that are 1.5" under my heel, how would you gain less than 1.5" from your Nike Shox if they are of similar design? The gain in height only because to decrease.
The only thing making Glenn look taller than Taker in the staredown from far away, is his hair. At 1:33 you can see the tops of their heads as well where Glenn' hair is lighter. In the close up of the staredown, Taker's eyes are about about .5" lower than Glenn's. With Taker's remaining head height being greater than Glenn's, he would have to be exactly the same height, or taller. To top it off, if their heads were at the same posture (Taker leaning down slightly, Glenn more than straight up) their chins would be level so Taker must be taller because it is absolutely undeniable that he has a taller skull than Glenn. It's very clear that they are same height in the stardeown so Taker in the end is slightly taller, after you compensate for Taker's wider stance.
If I gain 1.5" from my wrestling boots that are 1.5" under my heel, how would you gain less than 1.5" from your Nike Shox if they are of similar design? The gain in height only because to decrease.
The only thing making Glenn look taller than Taker in the staredown from far away, is his hair. At 1:33 you can see the tops of their heads as well where Glenn' hair is lighter. In the close up of the staredown, Taker's eyes are about about .5" lower than Glenn's. With Taker's remaining head height being greater than Glenn's, he would have to be exactly the same height, or taller. To top it off, if their heads were at the same posture (Taker leaning down slightly, Glenn more than straight up) their chins would be level so Taker must be taller because it is absolutely undeniable that he has a taller skull than Glenn. It's very clear that they are same height in the stardeown so Taker in the end is slightly taller, after you compensate for Taker's wider stance.
Rantsrob said on 26/Mar/09
So yankem was on his tip toes and taker was slouching putting kane around 6'5'' and taker about 6'9'' tuga?
So yankem was on his tip toes and taker was slouching putting kane around 6'5'' and taker about 6'9'' tuga?
Alex said on 26/Mar/09
Nike Shox give very close to 1.5 inches in height so say you're 5'10 you'll be almost 5'11 1/2 in Nike Shox.
Nike Shox give very close to 1.5 inches in height so say you're 5'10 you'll be almost 5'11 1/2 in Nike Shox.
tuga said on 26/Mar/09
Since taker yankem staredown is still debated I downloaded the match, its much easier to get any conclusions, follow this link:
Click Here
About the staredown yankem is in his tip toes clearly, notice the difference between postures, taker also has a wider stance but also just a little camera advantage, in full body its easy to see half an inch advantage for kane, but imo its more of an ilusion create by his puffy hair because if you pause at the right time at 1.37 you can see almost the top of their heads...They are evenly matched.
But this has been discussed a lot, the reason I wanted a better view of the video was this:
Pause at 1.52 and take a good look at yankem
Since taker yankem staredown is still debated I downloaded the match, its much easier to get any conclusions, follow this link:
Click Here
About the staredown yankem is in his tip toes clearly, notice the difference between postures, taker also has a wider stance but also just a little camera advantage, in full body its easy to see half an inch advantage for kane, but imo its more of an ilusion create by his puffy hair because if you pause at the right time at 1.37 you can see almost the top of their heads...They are evenly matched.
But this has been discussed a lot, the reason I wanted a better view of the video was this:
Pause at 1.52 and take a good look at yankem
gazz said on 25/Mar/09
every arguement for taker being taller can be counteracted by the yankem staredown, before jacobs turns his head away he is 0.5' taller quite easily, i dont see how people can not see that.... absolutely no lifts, if anything taker would of had the bigger boots
every arguement for taker being taller can be counteracted by the yankem staredown, before jacobs turns his head away he is 0.5' taller quite easily, i dont see how people can not see that.... absolutely no lifts, if anything taker would of had the bigger boots
Da Man said on 25/Mar/09
Nike Shox are built almost exactly like those wrestling boots, Shock!
Shox do NOT put the toe area flat on the ground, the sole in a Nike Shox under the ball of the foot (which is not under the lateral malleluous) is CONCEALED and is actually 15/16" thick! This is how the Shox soles are constructed (forgive the sloppiness): Click Here
There is no way to get a 1:1 gain from footwear unless the foot is placed on perfectly horizontal plane. This is why height increases from lifts are ever diminishing.
Nike Shox are built almost exactly like those wrestling boots, Shock!
Shox do NOT put the toe area flat on the ground, the sole in a Nike Shox under the ball of the foot (which is not under the lateral malleluous) is CONCEALED and is actually 15/16" thick! This is how the Shox soles are constructed (forgive the sloppiness): Click Here
There is no way to get a 1:1 gain from footwear unless the foot is placed on perfectly horizontal plane. This is why height increases from lifts are ever diminishing.
Anonymous said on 25/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 24/Mar/09
Click Here - not using for height comparison, just to show boots. I am fairly certain Taker's are 1", and Triple H, Batista, Randy Orton, Ted DiBiase Jr, Cody Rhodes, all use this brand, with different cuts but I have not seen these boots so I don't know for sure. Big Show's here do not seem to be his typical boots, which are still a bit thicker but his normal design is more like Kane's. I think it's even noticable here that Kane has both boot heel and internal lift.
those are big shows normal boots that he has worn since his return, as you can see his heels and takers heels are identical, the only difference in the boot is that shows feet are size 18EEEEE and takers are not
Shock of Electric says on 24/Mar/09
Click Here - not using for height comparison, just to show boots. I am fairly certain Taker's are 1", and Triple H, Batista, Randy Orton, Ted DiBiase Jr, Cody Rhodes, all use this brand, with different cuts but I have not seen these boots so I don't know for sure. Big Show's here do not seem to be his typical boots, which are still a bit thicker but his normal design is more like Kane's. I think it's even noticable here that Kane has both boot heel and internal lift.
those are big shows normal boots that he has worn since his return, as you can see his heels and takers heels are identical, the only difference in the boot is that shows feet are size 18EEEEE and takers are not
tuga said on 25/Mar/09
sid says on 25/Mar/09
Shock of Electric what are you talking about.. issac is kane.. Glenn jacobs.. how is issac taller.. and kane shorter when there both the same guy...issac taller taker.. he was just a jobber.. he didnt need to wear height advantage boots.. kane taller then taker..by a inch still always has been...
What?
Kane an inch taller? Yankem character had one and only thing going for him: SIZE, vince does promote it well...
But this as been discussed so much with different views...next!
One of the latest subjects discussed comparing taker and kane was with viscera/mabel, check it out here and at viscera page...
sid says on 25/Mar/09
Shock of Electric what are you talking about.. issac is kane.. Glenn jacobs.. how is issac taller.. and kane shorter when there both the same guy...issac taller taker.. he was just a jobber.. he didnt need to wear height advantage boots.. kane taller then taker..by a inch still always has been...
What?
Kane an inch taller? Yankem character had one and only thing going for him: SIZE, vince does promote it well...
But this as been discussed so much with different views...next!
One of the latest subjects discussed comparing taker and kane was with viscera/mabel, check it out here and at viscera page...
sid said on 25/Mar/09
Shock of Electric what are you talking about.. issac is kane.. Glenn jacobs.. how is issac taller.. and kane shorter when there both the same guy...issac taller taker.. he was just a jobber.. he didnt need to wear height advantage boots.. kane taller then taker..by a inch still always has been...
Shock of Electric what are you talking about.. issac is kane.. Glenn jacobs.. how is issac taller.. and kane shorter when there both the same guy...issac taller taker.. he was just a jobber.. he didnt need to wear height advantage boots.. kane taller then taker..by a inch still always has been...
Shock of Electric said on 24/Mar/09
I'm 1.5" taller in those boots, exactly the max height of the heel. The markings you make indicate I should be 5'9.25" in them, but I'm 5'9.5" in them. Looking at the pic of Nike Shox on this site, there is obviously more contrast in height from front to back, and they are not of the same design as wrestling boots.
I am more than capable of continuing without "personal slights" if you are capable of not throwing out viable examples like what we just discussed. Just keep to the numbers and don't get arrogant or have an attitude about it because you do yourself more of a disservice by coming back with such a brazen position when people merely offer examples.
You say that everything I present is wrong simply because I "don't grasp" how the heels work on boots, but I'm not wrong because the heights of these heels are not astronimcal with a steep incline, so the reason why I would wrong doesn't even apply here. In fact, the largest boots we're dealing with are Kane's 2" from 1997-99, and they have enough under his toes to not raise his foot to the point where he doesn't gain 1:1 for every fraction of an inch the heel is.
I could understand, maybe, if their toes were flat on the ground in front like they nearly are in those Nike Shox, but they aren't. There's about a half inch or more of platform on larger wrestling boots. Old boots like Andre the Giant's early 80s were one layer straight across, Hogan's mid 80s were a layer, plus one wedged, then early 90s two full layers and one wedged, same as Undertaker's for the most part of the 90s. The full thickness of the heel runs far enough under the ball of the foot to get all the height it provides.
Click Here - not using for height comparison, just to show boots. I am fairly certain Taker's are 1", and Triple H, Batista, Randy Orton, Ted DiBiase Jr, Cody Rhodes, all use this brand, with different cuts but I have not seen these boots so I don't know for sure. Big Show's here do not seem to be his typical boots, which are still a bit thicker but his normal design is more like Kane's. I think it's even noticable here that Kane has both boot heel and internal lift.
I'm 1.5" taller in those boots, exactly the max height of the heel. The markings you make indicate I should be 5'9.25" in them, but I'm 5'9.5" in them. Looking at the pic of Nike Shox on this site, there is obviously more contrast in height from front to back, and they are not of the same design as wrestling boots.
I am more than capable of continuing without "personal slights" if you are capable of not throwing out viable examples like what we just discussed. Just keep to the numbers and don't get arrogant or have an attitude about it because you do yourself more of a disservice by coming back with such a brazen position when people merely offer examples.
You say that everything I present is wrong simply because I "don't grasp" how the heels work on boots, but I'm not wrong because the heights of these heels are not astronimcal with a steep incline, so the reason why I would wrong doesn't even apply here. In fact, the largest boots we're dealing with are Kane's 2" from 1997-99, and they have enough under his toes to not raise his foot to the point where he doesn't gain 1:1 for every fraction of an inch the heel is.
I could understand, maybe, if their toes were flat on the ground in front like they nearly are in those Nike Shox, but they aren't. There's about a half inch or more of platform on larger wrestling boots. Old boots like Andre the Giant's early 80s were one layer straight across, Hogan's mid 80s were a layer, plus one wedged, then early 90s two full layers and one wedged, same as Undertaker's for the most part of the 90s. The full thickness of the heel runs far enough under the ball of the foot to get all the height it provides.
Click Here - not using for height comparison, just to show boots. I am fairly certain Taker's are 1", and Triple H, Batista, Randy Orton, Ted DiBiase Jr, Cody Rhodes, all use this brand, with different cuts but I have not seen these boots so I don't know for sure. Big Show's here do not seem to be his typical boots, which are still a bit thicker but his normal design is more like Kane's. I think it's even noticable here that Kane has both boot heel and internal lift.
Rantsrob said on 24/Mar/09
Yankem is taller in the video, period. I dont even see a valid argument for saying taker is taller in the video. When its plain as day whos taller. This doesn't mean kanes taller, but he is taller in the yankem/taker staredown.
Yankem is taller in the video, period. I dont even see a valid argument for saying taker is taller in the video. When its plain as day whos taller. This doesn't mean kanes taller, but he is taller in the yankem/taker staredown.
Da Man said on 24/Mar/09
What is under the pivot point of the foot determines how much height increase footwear gives you over barefoot. My Nike Shox (size 14 and not a stilletto, similar geometry to a larger wrestling boot) measure 1-7/8" under the heel, i.e. directly below the lateral malleolus. They provide a 1-3/8" increase over barefoot, not 1-7/8".
Click Here
I do not lose interest because I am being "called out", but because you seem unable to continue a conversation without personal slights. The latest slight - "bully." I think you are doing a disservice to yourself with these comments, I think it shows a lack of confidence in your position.
What is under the pivot point of the foot determines how much height increase footwear gives you over barefoot. My Nike Shox (size 14 and not a stilletto, similar geometry to a larger wrestling boot) measure 1-7/8" under the heel, i.e. directly below the lateral malleolus. They provide a 1-3/8" increase over barefoot, not 1-7/8".
Click Here
I do not lose interest because I am being "called out", but because you seem unable to continue a conversation without personal slights. The latest slight - "bully." I think you are doing a disservice to yourself with these comments, I think it shows a lack of confidence in your position.
Big Show said on 24/Mar/09
Click Here
Here's a tag-team match of Kane & Undertaker from 2001. There's a backstage segment at the end, where Kane clearly looks taller.
Click Here
Here's a tag-team match of Kane & Undertaker from 2001. There's a backstage segment at the end, where Kane clearly looks taller.
Eric 1 said on 23/Mar/09
SHock of electric i have the video of the taker and yankem match and before the camera goes close in its actually close out and yankem aka kane is clearly taller then taker. Thats a way better estimate then the royal rumble 03 which kanes legs are wide apart bent and slouched. How can you judge off of that. If my feet are 2 feet apart and my legs half bent then a person 5ft10 would appear taller then me even though im a smudge over 5ft11
SHock of electric i have the video of the taker and yankem match and before the camera goes close in its actually close out and yankem aka kane is clearly taller then taker. Thats a way better estimate then the royal rumble 03 which kanes legs are wide apart bent and slouched. How can you judge off of that. If my feet are 2 feet apart and my legs half bent then a person 5ft10 would appear taller then me even though im a smudge over 5ft11
Shock of Electric said on 23/Mar/09
Wrestling boots are not the same as stiletto heels. We're not measuring where the back of the heel forms around the ball of the foot. What is under the ball of you foot will make you that much taller no matter what.
Click Here - these boots make me exactly 1.5 and less than 1/16" taller than I am barefoot. There is a paper thin piece of white foam between my feet and the sole that is crushed by my body weight. Can you illustrate what you mean with this pic? Because from the way you explain it, I should only get about 1" more from these. I just want to know where I'm wrong here, and where physics is failing me.
I think you lose interest because you're being called out. You clearly try to bully people away with what is not at all as concrete as you think. In your Yankem Taker pic, I think if you make those lines meet in the middle, you'll have a more accurate reading. Compensate for Taker's feet being wider, and you'll have a .25" taller Undertaker.
Wrestling boots are not the same as stiletto heels. We're not measuring where the back of the heel forms around the ball of the foot. What is under the ball of you foot will make you that much taller no matter what.
Click Here - these boots make me exactly 1.5 and less than 1/16" taller than I am barefoot. There is a paper thin piece of white foam between my feet and the sole that is crushed by my body weight. Can you illustrate what you mean with this pic? Because from the way you explain it, I should only get about 1" more from these. I just want to know where I'm wrong here, and where physics is failing me.
I think you lose interest because you're being called out. You clearly try to bully people away with what is not at all as concrete as you think. In your Yankem Taker pic, I think if you make those lines meet in the middle, you'll have a more accurate reading. Compensate for Taker's feet being wider, and you'll have a .25" taller Undertaker.
nick said on 23/Mar/09
and everyone better not just make believe that viscera video i just posted doesnt exsist. I think kane and taker are both 6'7.5 (same height) and to everyone who thinks taker is shorter take a **big**look at that viscera video
and everyone better not just make believe that viscera video i just posted doesnt exsist. I think kane and taker are both 6'7.5 (same height) and to everyone who thinks taker is shorter take a **big**look at that viscera video
nick said on 23/Mar/09
well that just proves my point of the weirdness of that video doesnt it tuga.
well that just proves my point of the weirdness of that video doesnt it tuga.
tuga said on 23/Mar/09
nick says on 22/Mar/09
well here is kane and big vis, kane is a smudge taller,hmm although i love debate and i myself believe taker and kane are the same height, didnt taker have vis by an inch and a half? yes. did they have similiar footwear then? yes.
nick, go to viscera
nick says on 22/Mar/09
well here is kane and big vis, kane is a smudge taller,hmm although i love debate and i myself believe taker and kane are the same height, didnt taker have vis by an inch and a half? yes. did they have similiar footwear then? yes.
nick, go to viscera
Da Man said on 23/Mar/09
Kane and Taker's posture *never* evens out in the RR'03 clip. This is a fact obvious to most here.
You don't seem to grasp how heel height actually correlates with increase over barefoot. You keep reference 1", 1.25" and 1.5" heel thicknesses and indicating the larger heels work out to an actual 1/4" an 1/2" height advantage over the 1" heel. They do not. Footwear's ability to boost height isn't even determined by overall heel thickness. This is why a 3" stiletto only boosts height by about 2-1/4", and a pair of Nike Shox that elevates the heel by 2" (including insole) only provides 1.4" increase over barefoot. There is a reason I have an attitude about being right about things like this, and it's because you're so blatantly wrong about things like this.
The lines in my photograph aren't meant to be scientific. They are rough estimates of the plane their nearest feet (to the camera) are in the pic, and the head lines are meant to illustrate how obvious it is that Taker's head does NOT end at the mask as you tried to claim wasn't clear in the pic, a rather ineffective bid to obfuscate evidence. It's also quite impossible that the lower line ends at the top of Yankem's head. The same can not be said for Taker: Click Here
This little exchange has begun to bore me. When people start claiming to have insight into the character of a poster based on a brief message board exchange I begin to lose interest rather quickly.
Kane and Taker's posture *never* evens out in the RR'03 clip. This is a fact obvious to most here.
You don't seem to grasp how heel height actually correlates with increase over barefoot. You keep reference 1", 1.25" and 1.5" heel thicknesses and indicating the larger heels work out to an actual 1/4" an 1/2" height advantage over the 1" heel. They do not. Footwear's ability to boost height isn't even determined by overall heel thickness. This is why a 3" stiletto only boosts height by about 2-1/4", and a pair of Nike Shox that elevates the heel by 2" (including insole) only provides 1.4" increase over barefoot. There is a reason I have an attitude about being right about things like this, and it's because you're so blatantly wrong about things like this.
The lines in my photograph aren't meant to be scientific. They are rough estimates of the plane their nearest feet (to the camera) are in the pic, and the head lines are meant to illustrate how obvious it is that Taker's head does NOT end at the mask as you tried to claim wasn't clear in the pic, a rather ineffective bid to obfuscate evidence. It's also quite impossible that the lower line ends at the top of Yankem's head. The same can not be said for Taker: Click Here
This little exchange has begun to bore me. When people start claiming to have insight into the character of a poster based on a brief message board exchange I begin to lose interest rather quickly.
Shock of Electric said on 22/Mar/09
In RR03, once they are in the close up, their posture evens out shortly after. Both have their heads slightly tilted and begin to walk. Right before they walk you can still tell that Taker is taller.
In the Yankem Taker staredown, those lines above their heads are not accurate. You can't even tell whose line belongs to whom because obviously the top one cannot be the top of Yankem's head or Taker's. The bottom line could very well be both. On top of that, since we're scutanizing this so deeply, Taker's feet are wider apart than Yankem's, and he's leaning his face into him, and he's behind Yankem on almost the same plane. The lines on the bottom, I don't even know what they represent exactly, I thought their heels maybe but neither of them are that big.
I made that comment because you give people a lot of unwarranted attitude and disrespect and clearly you don't look at numbers correctly. I simply wanted to see how you'd respond to conjecture and realized there is no common ground. That's why I said "Take that as you will."
You deny that Kane had more of a boot advantage than height advantage in 98-99 with Taker, but that is flat out wrong. You also have an attitude about being right with things like that. It'd be one thing if you were actually correct, but you're not. There's just less than 1" height difference, and more than 1" boot difference. The Yankem Taker pic, Taker could still very well be slightly taller. I think it's a quarter inch back then, it could be as little as an 8th. Glenn on the whole, is definitely not taller than Taker. The difference today is possibly more than in 95. I'm going to see if I can find some JBL Kane comparisons. I doubt he'll look any taller in his lifts than Taker does in normal boots.
In RR03, once they are in the close up, their posture evens out shortly after. Both have their heads slightly tilted and begin to walk. Right before they walk you can still tell that Taker is taller.
In the Yankem Taker staredown, those lines above their heads are not accurate. You can't even tell whose line belongs to whom because obviously the top one cannot be the top of Yankem's head or Taker's. The bottom line could very well be both. On top of that, since we're scutanizing this so deeply, Taker's feet are wider apart than Yankem's, and he's leaning his face into him, and he's behind Yankem on almost the same plane. The lines on the bottom, I don't even know what they represent exactly, I thought their heels maybe but neither of them are that big.
I made that comment because you give people a lot of unwarranted attitude and disrespect and clearly you don't look at numbers correctly. I simply wanted to see how you'd respond to conjecture and realized there is no common ground. That's why I said "Take that as you will."
You deny that Kane had more of a boot advantage than height advantage in 98-99 with Taker, but that is flat out wrong. You also have an attitude about being right with things like that. It'd be one thing if you were actually correct, but you're not. There's just less than 1" height difference, and more than 1" boot difference. The Yankem Taker pic, Taker could still very well be slightly taller. I think it's a quarter inch back then, it could be as little as an 8th. Glenn on the whole, is definitely not taller than Taker. The difference today is possibly more than in 95. I'm going to see if I can find some JBL Kane comparisons. I doubt he'll look any taller in his lifts than Taker does in normal boots.
nick said on 22/Mar/09
well here is kane and big vis, kane is a smudge taller,hmm although i love debate and i myself believe taker and kane are the same height, didnt taker have vis by an inch and a half? yes. did they have similiar footwear then? yes. Now kane wears big footwear and vicera also wears big footwear now, but saying vicera has bigger footwear then kane...well thats saying a lot but its not impossible Click Here
well here is kane and big vis, kane is a smudge taller,hmm although i love debate and i myself believe taker and kane are the same height, didnt taker have vis by an inch and a half? yes. did they have similiar footwear then? yes. Now kane wears big footwear and vicera also wears big footwear now, but saying vicera has bigger footwear then kane...well thats saying a lot but its not impossible Click Here
hs2009 said on 22/Mar/09
Kane was listed at 6'7" at 16 but was then listed at 6'8" in college & claims that he's just over 6'8".
I do believe that as he has no reason to claim that height when 99% of people would believe he was was 6'10"-7'0" if he claimed that height. I don't think that he's as low as a flat 6'7".
Kane was listed at 6'7" at 16 but was then listed at 6'8" in college & claims that he's just over 6'8".
I do believe that as he has no reason to claim that height when 99% of people would believe he was was 6'10"-7'0" if he claimed that height. I don't think that he's as low as a flat 6'7".
sid said on 22/Mar/09
Doink He could of grew a inch by then.. he was still in his early 20's he was still growing.. any people grow till 25
Doink He could of grew a inch by then.. he was still in his early 20's he was still growing.. any people grow till 25
Da Man said on 22/Mar/09
Shock says,
"In the RR03 clip, you can see Kane straighten up during the close up, and they even start walking. He is consistently .5" the entire time. I don't see how showing a guy coming out shorter than another is proving that he's taller."
It's all in the posture. The very same reason so many people today think Taker is 6'6".
Shock says,
"The top of Taker's head does not end where the mask is, there's another inch or so above that."
Yea, we know. Click Here
Shock says,
"Da Man, I made that comment to see how you'd respond since you constantly go against the rules of this site and since then I know what kind of person I'm dealing with."
You made a random comment on Taker's page to "test" me?
In what ways do I go against the rules of the site, Shock?
Shock says,
"In the RR03 clip, you can see Kane straighten up during the close up, and they even start walking. He is consistently .5" the entire time. I don't see how showing a guy coming out shorter than another is proving that he's taller."
It's all in the posture. The very same reason so many people today think Taker is 6'6".
Shock says,
"The top of Taker's head does not end where the mask is, there's another inch or so above that."
Yea, we know. Click Here
Shock says,
"Da Man, I made that comment to see how you'd respond since you constantly go against the rules of this site and since then I know what kind of person I'm dealing with."
You made a random comment on Taker's page to "test" me?
In what ways do I go against the rules of the site, Shock?
Shock of Electric said on 22/Mar/09
I don't trust Meltzer as far as I can throw him. He's a huge mark. He probably thinks Luger is 6'6".
I don't trust Meltzer as far as I can throw him. He's a huge mark. He probably thinks Luger is 6'6".
Rantsrob said on 22/Mar/09
Doink says on 21/Mar/09
Article with Kane's college FB coach stating he was listed as a 6-7 power forward when he played basketball (he played BB and FB) for Northeast Missouri State (now Truman State) Click Here
Meltzer today talking about the article: "Jacobs was a 6-7 forward (yes, that's his real height, not 7-0 or 6-9 as he wears thick lifts in his wrestling boots)" (Click Here)
Awesome find there doink, they seem legit billings. I'll take them as barefoot also, which would be open for fluctation which i'd say hes 6,7.5'' barefoot. Putting him over 6'8'' in shoes. Which seems very fair. People always argue about kane being 6'8'', but they dont realize Celebheights goes on barefoot mid day heights...i think? So i'd say all the more proof support his 6'7.5'' listing.
Doink says on 21/Mar/09
Article with Kane's college FB coach stating he was listed as a 6-7 power forward when he played basketball (he played BB and FB) for Northeast Missouri State (now Truman State) Click Here
Meltzer today talking about the article: "Jacobs was a 6-7 forward (yes, that's his real height, not 7-0 or 6-9 as he wears thick lifts in his wrestling boots)" (Click Here)
Awesome find there doink, they seem legit billings. I'll take them as barefoot also, which would be open for fluctation which i'd say hes 6,7.5'' barefoot. Putting him over 6'8'' in shoes. Which seems very fair. People always argue about kane being 6'8'', but they dont realize Celebheights goes on barefoot mid day heights...i think? So i'd say all the more proof support his 6'7.5'' listing.
nick said on 21/Mar/09
Click Here
well speaking of vicera, here is a staredown between vicera and kane. Kane looks a half inch taller at most, vicera may have a footwear advantage, but thats saying a lot since he would have to have a footwear *advantage* over kane.
Click Here
well speaking of vicera, here is a staredown between vicera and kane. Kane looks a half inch taller at most, vicera may have a footwear advantage, but thats saying a lot since he would have to have a footwear *advantage* over kane.
Shock of Electric said on 21/Mar/09
I have a question about "At one time in the past (as Yankem) he was supposed to have been billed 6ft 7"
Can someone provide evidence of that from WWF TV or documentation? The Isaac Yankem DDS bill was very much stressed as 6'10" by the King and Vince, with the occasional JR billing blunders into 6'8" or 9. I really don't think that comment has any merit. PWI occasionally listed him as 6'7" but they are known for erroneous billings.
I have a question about "At one time in the past (as Yankem) he was supposed to have been billed 6ft 7"
Can someone provide evidence of that from WWF TV or documentation? The Isaac Yankem DDS bill was very much stressed as 6'10" by the King and Vince, with the occasional JR billing blunders into 6'8" or 9. I really don't think that comment has any merit. PWI occasionally listed him as 6'7" but they are known for erroneous billings.
Doink said on 21/Mar/09
Article with Kane's college FB coach stating he was listed as a 6-7 power forward when he played basketball (he played BB and FB) for Northeast Missouri State (now Truman State) Click Here
Meltzer today talking about the article: "Jacobs was a 6-7 forward (yes, that's his real height, not 7-0 or 6-9 as he wears thick lifts in his wrestling boots)" (Click Here)
Article with Kane's college FB coach stating he was listed as a 6-7 power forward when he played basketball (he played BB and FB) for Northeast Missouri State (now Truman State) Click Here
Meltzer today talking about the article: "Jacobs was a 6-7 forward (yes, that's his real height, not 7-0 or 6-9 as he wears thick lifts in his wrestling boots)" (Click Here)
Rantsrob said on 21/Mar/09
If i didnt know kane at all. I'd say in his unabomb entrance he looked atleast 6'9'' to 6'10''
If i didnt know kane at all. I'd say in his unabomb entrance he looked atleast 6'9'' to 6'10''
KingNick said on 21/Mar/09
The only match I think no one has seen/found on any site yet between Mark Calloway and Glen Jacobs is Undertake vs. The Fake Diesle. They fought on Superstars once, I saw pictures online some time ago, but nothing good for a height comparison. Maybe someone could track that down.
The only match I think no one has seen/found on any site yet between Mark Calloway and Glen Jacobs is Undertake vs. The Fake Diesle. They fought on Superstars once, I saw pictures online some time ago, but nothing good for a height comparison. Maybe someone could track that down.
tuga said on 21/Mar/09
Shock of Electric says on 21/Mar/09
I'll look through my tapes and see if I have that match as well.
Now that would be great ;)
You did a great job on Viscera
Shock of Electric says on 21/Mar/09
I'll look through my tapes and see if I have that match as well.
Now that would be great ;)
You did a great job on Viscera
Shock of Electric said on 21/Mar/09
Da Man, I made that comment to see how you'd respond since you constantly go against the rules of this site and since then I know what kind of person I'm dealing with.
I specifically meant to address that sometimes JR downtalks height bills and strays away from the written ones, but most of the time goes with the status quo. You are too selective about what you think people say.
When Glenn was the Fake Diesel, he also said he was nearly 7' and later said 6'8-6'9" randomly in a match, to which Vince says "No wait a minute you said he was almost 7 feet earlier." and JR responds "He's just under 7 feet, I'm being honest." The point of saying this is, why is JR straying from written, documented, advertised, company height bills? Indy and Territorial "guessing" from commentators is frequent, but doing that in the WWE is weird. In Taker's DVD in a 5 minute span Kane calls him 6'10" - 6'11", JR says 6'9" 6'10", and Taker himself says 6'8, 6'9". But then people on here call him 6'7" - 6'8".
Da Man, I made that comment to see how you'd respond since you constantly go against the rules of this site and since then I know what kind of person I'm dealing with.
I specifically meant to address that sometimes JR downtalks height bills and strays away from the written ones, but most of the time goes with the status quo. You are too selective about what you think people say.
When Glenn was the Fake Diesel, he also said he was nearly 7' and later said 6'8-6'9" randomly in a match, to which Vince says "No wait a minute you said he was almost 7 feet earlier." and JR responds "He's just under 7 feet, I'm being honest." The point of saying this is, why is JR straying from written, documented, advertised, company height bills? Indy and Territorial "guessing" from commentators is frequent, but doing that in the WWE is weird. In Taker's DVD in a 5 minute span Kane calls him 6'10" - 6'11", JR says 6'9" 6'10", and Taker himself says 6'8, 6'9". But then people on here call him 6'7" - 6'8".
sid said on 21/Mar/09
labzystud I seen kane.. man your bulling I saw kane in feb.. he looked bulky he looked much taller then 6'6..I saw him up close he was in front of me...he looked 6'8 to me...I HAD A FRIEND WHO WAS 6'6, from what i seen my friend and kane. kane looked taller.. possibly 2.25 inches on my friend. thats my estimation
labzystud I seen kane.. man your bulling I saw kane in feb.. he looked bulky he looked much taller then 6'6..I saw him up close he was in front of me...he looked 6'8 to me...I HAD A FRIEND WHO WAS 6'6, from what i seen my friend and kane. kane looked taller.. possibly 2.25 inches on my friend. thats my estimation
Shock of Electric said on 21/Mar/09
Glen's boots in his match vs Bret are smaller than the ones in the match vs Taker. The pics shown are so blurry you can't even tell there difference between the boot and sole in some of them. There is a pic that makes it look like there's no sole at all when we know there is, and that could even be a wrinkle in the canvas obscuring it. They are either 1" or 1.25" but certainly not as big as the 1.5" he wears now, or the 2" platforms from 97-99.
Taker's are smaller in almost all comparisons but definitel not in RR03, possibly not in 95, but Taker often wore boots less than 1" then so they still could be. Regardless of boot comparison in the Yankem match, the only thing making Glenn look taller in the staredown is his hair. The top of Taker's head does not end where the mask is, there's another inch or so above that. I'll look through my tapes and see if I have that match as well.
In the RR03 clip, you can see Kane straighten up during the close up, and they even start walking. He is consistently .5" the entire time. I don't see how showing a guy coming out shorter than another is proving that he's taller. What about the comparison from last year where they are the same height when Kane has a boot advantage? Nothing was said about that.
Glen's boots in his match vs Bret are smaller than the ones in the match vs Taker. The pics shown are so blurry you can't even tell there difference between the boot and sole in some of them. There is a pic that makes it look like there's no sole at all when we know there is, and that could even be a wrinkle in the canvas obscuring it. They are either 1" or 1.25" but certainly not as big as the 1.5" he wears now, or the 2" platforms from 97-99.
Taker's are smaller in almost all comparisons but definitel not in RR03, possibly not in 95, but Taker often wore boots less than 1" then so they still could be. Regardless of boot comparison in the Yankem match, the only thing making Glenn look taller in the staredown is his hair. The top of Taker's head does not end where the mask is, there's another inch or so above that. I'll look through my tapes and see if I have that match as well.
In the RR03 clip, you can see Kane straighten up during the close up, and they even start walking. He is consistently .5" the entire time. I don't see how showing a guy coming out shorter than another is proving that he's taller. What about the comparison from last year where they are the same height when Kane has a boot advantage? Nothing was said about that.
Da Man said on 20/Mar/09
Since some here like to psychoanalyze JR's billings, they might find his comments in this video kind of interesting. Click Here
Since some here like to psychoanalyze JR's billings, they might find his comments in this video kind of interesting. Click Here
sid said on 20/Mar/09
hs2009 Ya man he looks 6'8 there with Sting. did check where Glenn was the liberty forum last week I posted lastnite..look how much taller he is then other I'd say 6'8 6'9 in shoes...he check it out.. that goes for everyone.
hs2009 Ya man he looks 6'8 there with Sting. did check where Glenn was the liberty forum last week I posted lastnite..look how much taller he is then other I'd say 6'8 6'9 in shoes...he check it out.. that goes for everyone.
Eric 1 said on 20/Mar/09
Da man im not saying your wrong however lets get some clear pics for that era to see the exact difference. We should post pics from all of kanes boots from all his eras
Da man im not saying your wrong however lets get some clear pics for that era to see the exact difference. We should post pics from all of kanes boots from all his eras
hs2009 said on 20/Mar/09
Nice finds Sid! I agree he looks legit 6'8".
Kane really has had a million gimmicks in his career hasn't he :P
Nice finds Sid! I agree he looks legit 6'8".
Kane really has had a million gimmicks in his career hasn't he :P
sid said on 20/Mar/09
Heres Glenn jacobs speaking last week at the liberty forum..look how much he towers over people I'd say 6'8.. in shoes he's 6'9 Click Here
Heres Glenn jacobs speaking last week at the liberty forum..look how much he towers over people I'd say 6'8.. in shoes he's 6'9 Click Here
sid said on 20/Mar/09
Heres Glenn jacobs as Bruiser Mastino in wcw fighting sting.. very rare video.he looks 6'8 there.. didnt have his monster.. cause he's a jobber Click Here
Heres Glenn jacobs as Bruiser Mastino in wcw fighting sting.. very rare video.he looks 6'8 there.. didnt have his monster.. cause he's a jobber Click Here
Da Man said on 19/Mar/09
Eric says,
"Da Man there is no way that kanes boots from 2001 were anything close to what they are now. His boots in 2001 were close to 1995 isaac yankem boots."
Eric, the 2001 era boots and the 1995 Yankem boots are nothing alike! His Yankem boots are legititmate flats!
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Compared to 2001: Click Here
...there is no comparison.
The 2001 RR boots look like the boots he normally wrestles in today. Smaller than his rarely used Munsters, notably smaller than his 1998 era boots, but clearly and plainly bigger than the Yankem footwear. Just look at the angle of his foot within the boot. Kane's probably getting around 1.5" of actual increase over barefoot in those 2001 era boots, from a 1.75"-2" heel thickness. The Yankem boots had nothing over 1" heel thickness which would provide him with a bit less than 1" height advantage versus barefoot. Kane looks more than 1/2" taller than Taker in the video you linked, not surprisingly.
Eric says,
"Da Man there is no way that kanes boots from 2001 were anything close to what they are now. His boots in 2001 were close to 1995 isaac yankem boots."
Eric, the 2001 era boots and the 1995 Yankem boots are nothing alike! His Yankem boots are legititmate flats!
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Compared to 2001: Click Here
...there is no comparison.
The 2001 RR boots look like the boots he normally wrestles in today. Smaller than his rarely used Munsters, notably smaller than his 1998 era boots, but clearly and plainly bigger than the Yankem footwear. Just look at the angle of his foot within the boot. Kane's probably getting around 1.5" of actual increase over barefoot in those 2001 era boots, from a 1.75"-2" heel thickness. The Yankem boots had nothing over 1" heel thickness which would provide him with a bit less than 1" height advantage versus barefoot. Kane looks more than 1/2" taller than Taker in the video you linked, not surprisingly.
Clay said on 19/Mar/09
I agree with a lift up to 6'8 for Glen.
I agree with a lift up to 6'8 for Glen.
Eric 1 said on 19/Mar/09
thanks nick. Da Man there is no way that kanes boots from 2001 were anything close to what they are now. His boots in 2001 were close to 1995 isaac yankem boots.
thanks nick. Da Man there is no way that kanes boots from 2001 were anything close to what they are now. His boots in 2001 were close to 1995 isaac yankem boots.
nick said on 18/Mar/09
eric great video, however takers boots are thinner. Probobly a half inch, which is about the difference in the video. You really have to understand that kane wears lifts, his shoes there were the smallest iv seen for him probobly 1.5, and takers about an inch. Ithink that kane and taker are both between 6'7+ and 6'8. Well never know for sure whos that quarter inch taller though, but one is:)
eric great video, however takers boots are thinner. Probobly a half inch, which is about the difference in the video. You really have to understand that kane wears lifts, his shoes there were the smallest iv seen for him probobly 1.5, and takers about an inch. Ithink that kane and taker are both between 6'7+ and 6'8. Well never know for sure whos that quarter inch taller though, but one is:)
Eric 1 said on 18/Mar/09
Da mans comment is correct.
Da mans comment is correct.
Eric 1 said on 18/Mar/09
I dont understand. All you guys have to do is post some pics of the royal rumble 2001 match to see. He has no boost in those boots. Those were regular boots. Ray your right he does wear monster boots but what your not right about is that you think he always has. Thats wrong. Once he switched to the tank top he wore regular wrestling boots with no advantage. He wore monster boots when he debuted and he wears them now somtimes.
I dont understand. All you guys have to do is post some pics of the royal rumble 2001 match to see. He has no boost in those boots. Those were regular boots. Ray your right he does wear monster boots but what your not right about is that you think he always has. Thats wrong. Once he switched to the tank top he wore regular wrestling boots with no advantage. He wore monster boots when he debuted and he wears them now somtimes.
Cobra said on 18/Mar/09
Time to upgrade an inch, Rob. To 204 cm.
Time to upgrade an inch, Rob. To 204 cm.
Da Man said on 18/Mar/09
Kane did have a boot advantage in 2001 (comparable to his current footwear), but he did not as Yankem or in 2003 when he returned with the open face-mask.
Kane did have a boot advantage in 2001 (comparable to his current footwear), but he did not as Yankem or in 2003 when he returned with the open face-mask.
Ray said on 18/Mar/09
I'll have to agree with Rantsrob; I've never seen Kane in normal boots; always has a boost. The boots he wore in Royal Rumble 2001 look like the same boots he wears today which kind of look a little less chunky than his debut boots but still give him height advantage over others.
I'll have to agree with Rantsrob; I've never seen Kane in normal boots; always has a boost. The boots he wore in Royal Rumble 2001 look like the same boots he wears today which kind of look a little less chunky than his debut boots but still give him height advantage over others.
tyn man said on 18/Mar/09
kane has gota b taller than 202cm. i beleave big show is at least a 7ft legit, n the dif aint that much! i say kane is 205cm. taker about the same. nah bout 6"11 n khali 7"2 or 7"3
kane has gota b taller than 202cm. i beleave big show is at least a 7ft legit, n the dif aint that much! i say kane is 205cm. taker about the same. nah bout 6"11 n khali 7"2 or 7"3
Rantsrob said on 17/Mar/09
Kane deffinatly has a boot andvantage in royal rumble 2001, hes never wrestled a match in regular boots without some type of boost.
Kane deffinatly has a boot andvantage in royal rumble 2001, hes never wrestled a match in regular boots without some type of boost.
Da Man said on 17/Mar/09
Shock says
"What you fail to show is Kane changes his stance right before it switches to the close up so he is NOT standing like that during the close up,"
Wrong. Kane shifted his stance a bit by moving his right foot back a couple inches, but he did NOT close up his stance nor was his posture even remotely comparable to Taker's. I find this particular clip humorous because it actually works against the argument for Taker being taller than Kane barefoot, not vice versa. That is if you are willing to analyze the clip objectively.
Shock says
"What you fail to show is Kane changes his stance right before it switches to the close up so he is NOT standing like that during the close up,"
Wrong. Kane shifted his stance a bit by moving his right foot back a couple inches, but he did NOT close up his stance nor was his posture even remotely comparable to Taker's. I find this particular clip humorous because it actually works against the argument for Taker being taller than Kane barefoot, not vice versa. That is if you are willing to analyze the clip objectively.
Eric 1 said on 17/Mar/09
Im telling you guys in this video i posted kane has no foot wear advantage at all. Kane didnot wear such huge foot wear during this era also. This was before the bicep injury and after he stopped wearing monster boots. I am aware that he occasionally wears the monster foot wear.
Im telling you guys in this video i posted kane has no foot wear advantage at all. Kane didnot wear such huge foot wear during this era also. This was before the bicep injury and after he stopped wearing monster boots. I am aware that he occasionally wears the monster foot wear.
Eric 1 said on 17/Mar/09
Actually go to 45min and 38 seconds for the stardown no foot wear advantage for neither. There both straight up also.
Actually go to 45min and 38 seconds for the stardown no foot wear advantage for neither. There both straight up also.
Eric 1 said on 17/Mar/09
Click Here
Here you go stare down royal rumble 2001 kanes footwear is normal sized no foot advantage what so ever. Go to the 45 MINUTE MARK FOR THE STAREDOWN. KANE LOOKS TALLER.
Click Here
Here you go stare down royal rumble 2001 kanes footwear is normal sized no foot advantage what so ever. Go to the 45 MINUTE MARK FOR THE STAREDOWN. KANE LOOKS TALLER.
Eric 1 said on 17/Mar/09
Da man i just read your comment and i bursted out laughing with your sarcastic reply to shock of electric. SHock of electric that was pretty good work on your part however kanes feet are wide apart it looks as if one of his legs is bent so that actually leaves the question if he were standing straight up would he edge out taker by a little? I think its at least fair enough to boost both of them to 6ft8 cause we really dont know. Im leaning towards kane being a smudge taller. Both these men are monsters and 6ft8 is a good estimate. Enough with this 6ft7.5
Da man i just read your comment and i bursted out laughing with your sarcastic reply to shock of electric. SHock of electric that was pretty good work on your part however kanes feet are wide apart it looks as if one of his legs is bent so that actually leaves the question if he were standing straight up would he edge out taker by a little? I think its at least fair enough to boost both of them to 6ft8 cause we really dont know. Im leaning towards kane being a smudge taller. Both these men are monsters and 6ft8 is a good estimate. Enough with this 6ft7.5
Shock of Electric said on 17/Mar/09
What you fail to show is Kane changes his stance right before it switches to the close up so he is NOT standing like that during the close up, and in fact they both straight up more in the close up itself. In case you didn't notice, Taker's feet aren't exactly close together there either, their posture is the same in the pics I originally presented. Click Here
One more Click Here - different, but still alike posture, same height difference. You don't need lines to see Undertaker is taller than Kane which is all you need to know.
Explain why they are the same height in 2007 when Kane 1" has less of a boot advantage than he did in 1998? I'll explain why, because The Undertaker is slightly taller.
What you fail to show is Kane changes his stance right before it switches to the close up so he is NOT standing like that during the close up, and in fact they both straight up more in the close up itself. In case you didn't notice, Taker's feet aren't exactly close together there either, their posture is the same in the pics I originally presented. Click Here
One more Click Here - different, but still alike posture, same height difference. You don't need lines to see Undertaker is taller than Kane which is all you need to know.
Explain why they are the same height in 2007 when Kane 1" has less of a boot advantage than he did in 1998? I'll explain why, because The Undertaker is slightly taller.
Red said on 17/Mar/09
Shock of Electric, we
Shock of Electric, we
Da Man said on 17/Mar/09
Good job Shock, you've just exposed two examples of Kane with his feet about 2 feet apart.
Here's is Kane's posture from your second pic: Click Here
Good job Shock, you've just exposed two examples of Kane with his feet about 2 feet apart.
Here's is Kane's posture from your second pic: Click Here
Shock of Electric said on 17/Mar/09
What you are about to see may shock you.
Click Here - From Undertaker and Kane vs MVP and Mr. Kennedy on SD.
Kane with 0.25" - 0.5" boot advantage is the same height as Taker by direct comparison as of 2007/8. The original framing had a few degree lean of the camera, which I fixed by making the top rope straight across. It originally was a few pixels higher on Kane's end.
Here is the shocker:
Click Here - Royal Rumble 2003 (pointed out to me by a Kane fan)
Their footwear cannot be any more even in this match. In this match, the smallest boots Kane ever wore as Kane, and Taker's are essentially the same as he wears now, they are not work boots, they are wrestling boots.
Some background info, around this time Kane had come back from a bicep injury, lost significant muscle mass, and changed his ring attire, head to toe. Even Kane's shoulders/traps are lower that Taker's due to this. Their eyes are essentially level, and Taker as we know has more head height above the eyes than Kane in general. And yes, I know Taker has spikey hair. but that makes him look even more taller. Both men are in approximately 1.25" boots, and Kane is up to 0.5" shorter than Taker at this point, I always thought at least 0.25".
The proof is in the pudding. I didn't bother marking lines because I feel having to check these comparisons by yourself drives the point home more and people don't alway agree where the top of someone's head is. The point is to show that Taker is in fact taller in a fair comparison. I don't know how anyone can argue this when all anyone bases it on is the exact difference in uneven footwear. Watch the matches, look at footwear, camera angles, whatever you wish. There is no way Kane is taller, much less 1" taller
What you are about to see may shock you.
Click Here - From Undertaker and Kane vs MVP and Mr. Kennedy on SD.
Kane with 0.25" - 0.5" boot advantage is the same height as Taker by direct comparison as of 2007/8. The original framing had a few degree lean of the camera, which I fixed by making the top rope straight across. It originally was a few pixels higher on Kane's end.
Here is the shocker:
Click Here - Royal Rumble 2003 (pointed out to me by a Kane fan)
Their footwear cannot be any more even in this match. In this match, the smallest boots Kane ever wore as Kane, and Taker's are essentially the same as he wears now, they are not work boots, they are wrestling boots.
Some background info, around this time Kane had come back from a bicep injury, lost significant muscle mass, and changed his ring attire, head to toe. Even Kane's shoulders/traps are lower that Taker's due to this. Their eyes are essentially level, and Taker as we know has more head height above the eyes than Kane in general. And yes, I know Taker has spikey hair. but that makes him look even more taller. Both men are in approximately 1.25" boots, and Kane is up to 0.5" shorter than Taker at this point, I always thought at least 0.25".
The proof is in the pudding. I didn't bother marking lines because I feel having to check these comparisons by yourself drives the point home more and people don't alway agree where the top of someone's head is. The point is to show that Taker is in fact taller in a fair comparison. I don't know how anyone can argue this when all anyone bases it on is the exact difference in uneven footwear. Watch the matches, look at footwear, camera angles, whatever you wish. There is no way Kane is taller, much less 1" taller
Alex said on 16/Mar/09
Clay, I'd love to see the WWE wrestlers measured barefoot.
Clay, I'd love to see the WWE wrestlers measured barefoot.
Clay said on 16/Mar/09
For once while im still interested in this site I want the WWE to do a behind the scenes shot or something where they're actually measuring one of the wrestlers. Like if if they measured one of the huge guys before his fights then all of this baseless argueing and speculation would be over.
For once while im still interested in this site I want the WWE to do a behind the scenes shot or something where they're actually measuring one of the wrestlers. Like if if they measured one of the huge guys before his fights then all of this baseless argueing and speculation would be over.
Ray said on 15/Mar/09
That's a great one KingNick, Big Show got owned there as some would say. I can actually live with Kane being 6'8" and Taker being 6'7.5"; that actually makes sense since there's probably .5" difference between them if there is any difference at all. To me, I can still go either way with it being flipped around or both same height. Any of the 3 make the most sense. May just be a mystery we will never know unless we see footage of Kane and Taker spotted on the beach barefoot.
That's a great one KingNick, Big Show got owned there as some would say. I can actually live with Kane being 6'8" and Taker being 6'7.5"; that actually makes sense since there's probably .5" difference between them if there is any difference at all. To me, I can still go either way with it being flipped around or both same height. Any of the 3 make the most sense. May just be a mystery we will never know unless we see footage of Kane and Taker spotted on the beach barefoot.
tuga said on 15/Mar/09
Very nice kingNick.
Very nice kingNick.
MK said on 15/Mar/09
hs2009 says on 14/Mar/09
Good find KingNick! I never used to be a Big Show fan, I just thought he was wasting all his talent by being so greedy & overweight. But since he's been back, he looks in better shape & I've started to enjoy his feuds/matches again.
He's only 37 so hopefully in the next few years he can fulfill his potential & stay in shape.
Only 37?? You need to learn more about ACROMEGALY. There's no way Big Show will ever be able to stop his weight gain while he's with the wwe imo, just look at his match with Mayweather from not 12 months ago, he's gained at least 40lbs since then. Its a sad fact but it appears beyond his control.
hs2009 says on 14/Mar/09
Good find KingNick! I never used to be a Big Show fan, I just thought he was wasting all his talent by being so greedy & overweight. But since he's been back, he looks in better shape & I've started to enjoy his feuds/matches again.
He's only 37 so hopefully in the next few years he can fulfill his potential & stay in shape.
Only 37?? You need to learn more about ACROMEGALY. There's no way Big Show will ever be able to stop his weight gain while he's with the wwe imo, just look at his match with Mayweather from not 12 months ago, he's gained at least 40lbs since then. Its a sad fact but it appears beyond his control.
hs2009 said on 14/Mar/09
Good find KingNick! I never used to be a Big Show fan, I just thought he was wasting all his talent by being so greedy & overweight. But since he's been back, he looks in better shape & I've started to enjoy his feuds/matches again.
He's only 37 so hopefully in the next few years he can fulfill his potential & stay in shape.
Good find KingNick! I never used to be a Big Show fan, I just thought he was wasting all his talent by being so greedy & overweight. But since he's been back, he looks in better shape & I've started to enjoy his feuds/matches again.
He's only 37 so hopefully in the next few years he can fulfill his potential & stay in shape.
Da Man said on 14/Mar/09
Yea, that's great clip KingNick.
Yea, that's great clip KingNick.
KingNick said on 14/Mar/09
To lighten up things here a bit, here's a favorite clip of mine with Undertaker, Kane, and Big Show, it's pretty funny. A friend of mine isn't a Big Show fan (I am tho) and this was one of his favorite segments: Click Here
To lighten up things here a bit, here's a favorite clip of mine with Undertaker, Kane, and Big Show, it's pretty funny. A friend of mine isn't a Big Show fan (I am tho) and this was one of his favorite segments: Click Here
Alex said on 14/Mar/09
I could even say 6'8 for Kane and 6'7 for UT.
I could even say 6'8 for Kane and 6'7 for UT.
tuga said on 13/Mar/09
Rantsrob says on 12/Mar/09
Regardless of boots, there is no clear evidence of Undertaker being taller in any picture. As for kane, almost every picture/staredown he is taller.
Why regardless of boots?
Viscera with similar boots is almost as tall as kane for example. WHat if taker had viscera
Rantsrob says on 12/Mar/09
Regardless of boots, there is no clear evidence of Undertaker being taller in any picture. As for kane, almost every picture/staredown he is taller.
Why regardless of boots?
Viscera with similar boots is almost as tall as kane for example. WHat if taker had viscera
Da Man said on 13/Mar/09
I agree, Kane 6'8", Taker 6'7.5".
I agree, Kane 6'8", Taker 6'7.5".
Clay said on 12/Mar/09
Kane - 6'8
Calloway - 6'7.5
IMO.
Kane - 6'8
Calloway - 6'7.5
IMO.
Rantsrob said on 12/Mar/09
Regardless of boots, there is no clear evidence of Undertaker being taller in any picture. As for kane, almost every picture/staredown he is taller.
Regardless of boots, there is no clear evidence of Undertaker being taller in any picture. As for kane, almost every picture/staredown he is taller.
chevy backtosh said on 12/Mar/09
kane is 6'8.5 and UT is 6'7.85 it shows it clearly here on glen jacobs personal site with pics to prove. click on this link
kane is 6'8.5 and UT is 6'7.85 it shows it clearly here on glen jacobs personal site with pics to prove. click on this link
Danimal said on 11/Mar/09
CTR says on 10/Mar/09
UT is 6'9
kane is 6'6.5
Thank you. Try again.
CTR says on 10/Mar/09
UT is 6'9
kane is 6'6.5
Thank you. Try again.
Alex said on 11/Mar/09
My estimates for UT and Kane slightly change here and there but right now I'd say UT 6'7 and Kane 6'7.5.
My estimates for UT and Kane slightly change here and there but right now I'd say UT 6'7 and Kane 6'7.5.
said on 11/Mar/09
Yankem was bigger than Taker. You could see that. Taller and bulkier. His fluffy brown hair at the time gave him more height still. Taker looked apprehensive of Yankem but maybe the latter just had bad breath.
Yankem was bigger than Taker. You could see that. Taller and bulkier. His fluffy brown hair at the time gave him more height still. Taker looked apprehensive of Yankem but maybe the latter just had bad breath.
CTR said on 10/Mar/09
UT is 6'9
kane is 6'6.5
UT is 6'9
kane is 6'6.5
Ray said on 10/Mar/09
Da Man: In Kane's largest boots around his debut he had about an inch and at different times, mainly angles he could have slightly more like 1.25-1.5" but I'd say he would have that advantage in his boots.
eric 1: when Kane was Yankem he didn't have the huge boots he did as Kane debut but he still IMO had a slight advantage, maybe .25" and really some say Yankem was taller, some say Taker had the edge, and some say around the same height. Well, they were very close and it was hard to tell which goes to show you Jacobs did need the large boots as Kane to appear taller. Me personally always thought Taker edged him out. I couldn't find the Royal Rumble 2001 staredown. Around that time Kane was in the tanktop and still had large boots (though it didn't look as large as his debut but I'll have to see more photos/footage to be sure.) But it looked around that time that Kane had the same boots he wears today which still give him some advantage; his boots are still chunky today and they still look very close in height. Very debatable on who is taller due to Kane's boot advantage. His heel is noticeably bigger and I also think there's a chance he has a built in internal advantage. I am a huge Taker fan but also a an of Kanes and I'd have no problem if Kane was taller but I just can't look past his chunkier boots. Just put Kane in Taker's boots and have them face off and then I'd be more satisfied. Taker's boots are pretty flat.
Da Man: In Kane's largest boots around his debut he had about an inch and at different times, mainly angles he could have slightly more like 1.25-1.5" but I'd say he would have that advantage in his boots.
eric 1: when Kane was Yankem he didn't have the huge boots he did as Kane debut but he still IMO had a slight advantage, maybe .25" and really some say Yankem was taller, some say Taker had the edge, and some say around the same height. Well, they were very close and it was hard to tell which goes to show you Jacobs did need the large boots as Kane to appear taller. Me personally always thought Taker edged him out. I couldn't find the Royal Rumble 2001 staredown. Around that time Kane was in the tanktop and still had large boots (though it didn't look as large as his debut but I'll have to see more photos/footage to be sure.) But it looked around that time that Kane had the same boots he wears today which still give him some advantage; his boots are still chunky today and they still look very close in height. Very debatable on who is taller due to Kane's boot advantage. His heel is noticeably bigger and I also think there's a chance he has a built in internal advantage. I am a huge Taker fan but also a an of Kanes and I'd have no problem if Kane was taller but I just can't look past his chunkier boots. Just put Kane in Taker's boots and have them face off and then I'd be more satisfied. Taker's boots are pretty flat.
eric 1 said on 9/Mar/09
so ray if thats the case what are you gonna say about the 2001 royal rumble staredown the staredown between them when kane was yankem? The boots were equal in size at the 2001 royal rumble staredown. At this time period he didnt wear monster boots. Check out on you tube the footage from the 2001 royal rumble staredown and tell me what you think.
so ray if thats the case what are you gonna say about the 2001 royal rumble staredown the staredown between them when kane was yankem? The boots were equal in size at the 2001 royal rumble staredown. At this time period he didnt wear monster boots. Check out on you tube the footage from the 2001 royal rumble staredown and tell me what you think.
Da Man said on 9/Mar/09
Ray says
"Jacobs can edge out Calaway at times but his boots have ALWAYS been bulkier."
Not always...
And in the big boots he's got *over* an inch on Taker.
Ray says
"Jacobs can edge out Calaway at times but his boots have ALWAYS been bulkier."
Not always...
And in the big boots he's got *over* an inch on Taker.
sid said on 9/Mar/09
hs2009 Yep lol fair trade man, hot chick for kane sound kinda funny lmao....I Just got to talk to her, then bam he'll give it up, he doesn't have to give the real copies of the photos, just scan them send them, then email them.
hs2009 Yep lol fair trade man, hot chick for kane sound kinda funny lmao....I Just got to talk to her, then bam he'll give it up, he doesn't have to give the real copies of the photos, just scan them send them, then email them.
Clay said on 9/Mar/09
They're both 6'8 IMO. Undertaker may be lurking around at 6'7.5 today though.
They're both 6'8 IMO. Undertaker may be lurking around at 6'7.5 today though.
Ray said on 9/Mar/09
"Rantsrob says on 8/Mar/09
You can tell for Takers page there are some die hard Undertaker fans who arent even open to the opinion of Kane/Taker being the same height. If i have to hear about the length of Takers forehead one more time......YANKEM WAS CLEARLY TALLER NO MATTER WHAT EXCUSE YOU USE. Why cant even just have a full body picture of them both standing barefoot in a staredown?"
Nah, not IMO. Jacobs can edge out Calaway at times but his boots have ALWAYS been bulkier. Why? Because he needs the extar boost to appear more of a monster and taller. If he didn't weear the bigger boots he would probably be a little shorter than Taker which the WWE did and does not want.
"Rantsrob says on 8/Mar/09
You can tell for Takers page there are some die hard Undertaker fans who arent even open to the opinion of Kane/Taker being the same height. If i have to hear about the length of Takers forehead one more time......YANKEM WAS CLEARLY TALLER NO MATTER WHAT EXCUSE YOU USE. Why cant even just have a full body picture of them both standing barefoot in a staredown?"
Nah, not IMO. Jacobs can edge out Calaway at times but his boots have ALWAYS been bulkier. Why? Because he needs the extar boost to appear more of a monster and taller. If he didn't weear the bigger boots he would probably be a little shorter than Taker which the WWE did and does not want.
hs2009 said on 9/Mar/09
Lol Sid! Seems like a fair trade, some pictures for a girl :P
Lol Sid! Seems like a fair trade, some pictures for a girl :P
sid said on 8/Mar/09
hs2009 whenever my friend comes around to gives me the picture I will post them soon as possible, my guess is he doesn't wanna give them out, thats why he is stalling. I'll get them, he likes this chick I know so I can hook them up, so thats fair lol
hs2009 whenever my friend comes around to gives me the picture I will post them soon as possible, my guess is he doesn't wanna give them out, thats why he is stalling. I'll get them, he likes this chick I know so I can hook them up, so thats fair lol
sid said on 8/Mar/09
Vegas I met or shall I seen Kane really up close, I estimated 6'8 reason why I
hs2009 6'8 cause I had a friend on 6'6 he had 2 inches to 2'25 inches on my friend, this was back in 2000, never met him seen him really up close, now that friend is moved, that was 10 years ago he moved, I'd say kane still today is 6'8 region. when I saw him in feb of this year he still looked the same height give take a few 5cm off from 6'8'5, now today he is 6'8, he always seemed to have a inch on taker in street cloth when i saw them.
Vegas I met or shall I seen Kane really up close, I estimated 6'8 reason why I
hs2009 6'8 cause I had a friend on 6'6 he had 2 inches to 2'25 inches on my friend, this was back in 2000, never met him seen him really up close, now that friend is moved, that was 10 years ago he moved, I'd say kane still today is 6'8 region. when I saw him in feb of this year he still looked the same height give take a few 5cm off from 6'8'5, now today he is 6'8, he always seemed to have a inch on taker in street cloth when i saw them.
Rantsrob said on 8/Mar/09
You can tell for Takers page there are some die hard Undertaker fans who arent even open to the opinion of Kane/Taker being the same height. If i have to hear about the length of Takers forehead one more time......YANKEM WAS CLEARLY TALLER NO MATTER WHAT EXCUSE YOU USE. Why cant even just have a full body picture of them both standing barefoot in a staredown?
You can tell for Takers page there are some die hard Undertaker fans who arent even open to the opinion of Kane/Taker being the same height. If i have to hear about the length of Takers forehead one more time......YANKEM WAS CLEARLY TALLER NO MATTER WHAT EXCUSE YOU USE. Why cant even just have a full body picture of them both standing barefoot in a staredown?
Rantsrob said on 8/Mar/09
Vegas says on 8/Mar/09
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
It's annoying how people who have never even met Kane say he's 6'7" whereas you actually have met him & thought he was legit 6'8"+.
i met kane in streets and posted photos with my friends and video of him, he was wearing something like these Click Here i thought he was in the 6'7 region, i wouldn't disagree with rob's listing, i met matt morgan a few minutes before hand and he was at least an inch taller than kane and he was wearing sneakers and no hat
Can you post the pictures and video?
Vegas says on 8/Mar/09
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
It's annoying how people who have never even met Kane say he's 6'7" whereas you actually have met him & thought he was legit 6'8"+.
i met kane in streets and posted photos with my friends and video of him, he was wearing something like these Click Here i thought he was in the 6'7 region, i wouldn't disagree with rob's listing, i met matt morgan a few minutes before hand and he was at least an inch taller than kane and he was wearing sneakers and no hat
Can you post the pictures and video?
Vegas said on 8/Mar/09
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
It's annoying how people who have never even met Kane say he's 6'7" whereas you actually have met him & thought he was legit 6'8"+.
i met kane in streets and posted photos with my friends and video of him, he was wearing something like these Click Here i thought he was in the 6'7 region, i wouldn't disagree with rob's listing, i met matt morgan a few minutes before hand and he was at least an inch taller than kane and he was wearing sneakers and no hat
hs2009 says on 8/Mar/09
It's annoying how people who have never even met Kane say he's 6'7" whereas you actually have met him & thought he was legit 6'8"+.
i met kane in streets and posted photos with my friends and video of him, he was wearing something like these Click Here i thought he was in the 6'7 region, i wouldn't disagree with rob's listing, i met matt morgan a few minutes before hand and he was at least an inch taller than kane and he was wearing sneakers and no hat
hs2009 said on 8/Mar/09
I hope you can post the pics you have Sid!
It's annoying how people who have never even met Kane say he's 6'7" whereas you actually have met him & thought he was legit 6'8"+.
I hope you can post the pics you have Sid!
It's annoying how people who have never even met Kane say he's 6'7" whereas you actually have met him & thought he was legit 6'8"+.
sid said on 7/Mar/09
Clay I'm in western canada more then you are, I'm in vancouver B.c average height for men, is 5'9 to 6ft. I'm 5'10 myself. 245 right now all mass and with cut.. I saw kane in feb 6 here in vancouver, I estimated 6'8 maybe alittle more, he dwarfed everyone, he was the tallest guy on the roster and the crowd..he looked a inch taller in his ring gear, i'm still trying to retrieve pictures, from the event so I CAN POST IT ON HERE I KNOW WHAT I SAW.
Clay I'm in western canada more then you are, I'm in vancouver B.c average height for men, is 5'9 to 6ft. I'm 5'10 myself. 245 right now all mass and with cut.. I saw kane in feb 6 here in vancouver, I estimated 6'8 maybe alittle more, he dwarfed everyone, he was the tallest guy on the roster and the crowd..he looked a inch taller in his ring gear, i'm still trying to retrieve pictures, from the event so I CAN POST IT ON HERE I KNOW WHAT I SAW.
nick said on 7/Mar/09
6'2 average height hmmmm. impossible. 6'7, 5'8, 6'5, 6'0, 5'9 6'2, 6'1 5'7 6'6 6'4, 5'8 6'0 equals not even 6'2 average height.Imagine you encounter those heights on a stroll down the block everyday, now that opens your eyes. Eric not to knock on you or anything but you must hang out with maybe 20 people where half are taller towering and the other half are your height or a couple inches shorter which scews your reality of average. This means you see people like kanes height every single day and to a it would be like in the "real world" seeing a 6'3 guy. No big deal
When you say average you take into account millions of people eric not just your group of friends. Even if you lived in a town where everyone was 7 feet tall 10,000 plus people out of 1 million people that would scew the average less than an inch fact. This is what people are not getting about average.
6'2 average height hmmmm. impossible. 6'7, 5'8, 6'5, 6'0, 5'9 6'2, 6'1 5'7 6'6 6'4, 5'8 6'0 equals not even 6'2 average height.Imagine you encounter those heights on a stroll down the block everyday, now that opens your eyes. Eric not to knock on you or anything but you must hang out with maybe 20 people where half are taller towering and the other half are your height or a couple inches shorter which scews your reality of average. This means you see people like kanes height every single day and to a it would be like in the "real world" seeing a 6'3 guy. No big deal
When you say average you take into account millions of people eric not just your group of friends. Even if you lived in a town where everyone was 7 feet tall 10,000 plus people out of 1 million people that would scew the average less than an inch fact. This is what people are not getting about average.
hs2009 said on 6/Mar/09
That's why I said MOST people Danimal :D
He always looks 6'8" to me, the man is HUGE.
That's why I said MOST people Danimal :D
He always looks 6'8" to me, the man is HUGE.
Alex said on 5/Mar/09
I am still undecided on Kane's height for sure. All I can say is 6'7 minimum and 6'8 max.
I am still undecided on Kane's height for sure. All I can say is 6'7 minimum and 6'8 max.
Alex said on 5/Mar/09
Maybe 5'8-5'9 average worldwide but not in most countries. Most countries average 5'9-5'10 with a few 5'11 or taller. 5'10 seems average where in NY where I am from.
Maybe 5'8-5'9 average worldwide but not in most countries. Most countries average 5'9-5'10 with a few 5'11 or taller. 5'10 seems average where in NY where I am from.
Da Man said on 5/Mar/09
I'd like to see him bumped up to at least 6'7.75".
I'd like to see him bumped up to at least 6'7.75".
eric 1 said on 5/Mar/09
right on clay and labzystud. I agree. Kane told me in person when i asked he was 6ft8.5 and the proof shows that. He should at least be upgraded to 6ft8 since college basketball stats show that as well. they say the average height is 5ft8 i think that the average height now is 5ft10 easy. Im 5ft11 and change and close to 200 pounds.
right on clay and labzystud. I agree. Kane told me in person when i asked he was 6ft8.5 and the proof shows that. He should at least be upgraded to 6ft8 since college basketball stats show that as well. they say the average height is 5ft8 i think that the average height now is 5ft10 easy. Im 5ft11 and change and close to 200 pounds.
Danimal said on 5/Mar/09
hs2009 says on 5/Mar/09
Rob, would you consider upgrading Kane to 6'8" or 6'8.5" since most people seem to think he is that height
I don't. I think he's 6'7".
hs2009 says on 5/Mar/09
Rob, would you consider upgrading Kane to 6'8" or 6'8.5" since most people seem to think he is that height
I don't. I think he's 6'7".
hs2009 said on 5/Mar/09
Rob, would you consider upgrading Kane to 6'8" or 6'8.5" since most people seem to think he is that height?
Rob, would you consider upgrading Kane to 6'8" or 6'8.5" since most people seem to think he is that height?
labzystud said on 5/Mar/09
hey no point in discussing kane's height in which you put on a silly estimate from far.....
im 6ft3...n believe me.....i look not more than 5ft8 when im standing alone....but when someone around 6ft comes beside me...tha doubt is clear...
this phenomena..happens due to the bulkiness of the body....i have a heavy body(110 kg)...n so do kane....so he looks like 6ft 6 n so...but actual he's no less than 6ft 9 or maybe ..6 ft 10.....he stands nearly 1 feet tall than eric...which is qite noticiable from the picture....eric is 5 ft 11./..means kane is no less than 6ft 9 or 6 ft 10.....
hey no point in discussing kane's height in which you put on a silly estimate from far.....
im 6ft3...n believe me.....i look not more than 5ft8 when im standing alone....but when someone around 6ft comes beside me...tha doubt is clear...
this phenomena..happens due to the bulkiness of the body....i have a heavy body(110 kg)...n so do kane....so he looks like 6ft 6 n so...but actual he's no less than 6ft 9 or maybe ..6 ft 10.....he stands nearly 1 feet tall than eric...which is qite noticiable from the picture....eric is 5 ft 11./..means kane is no less than 6ft 9 or 6 ft 10.....
Rantsrob said on 5/Mar/09
I live in wester pa. and im alittle over average height. Most people are 5'10-6'0 with bigger builds.
I live in wester pa. and im alittle over average height. Most people are 5'10-6'0 with bigger builds.
eric 1 said on 4/Mar/09
where do all you guys live??? I live here in ny long island and im 5ft11 and change and i know alot of people that are 6ft4 and over . Im almost 6ft and it seems where i live im considered short cause around here everyone seems to be at least 6ft2. 6ft2 is the average height around here. All my friends that are 6ft4 give or take there head size, the top of my head comes up to the middle of there nose. My sparring partner tariq is 6ft3 and the top of my head comes up to his forehead. Look at the pic above with me and kane. The top of my head hardly makes it to his mouth and hes slouched with bad posture in the pic. when he first stood straight up before the pic he was standing straight and i was like this guy is an easy 6ft8. He had on black dress shoes. Not even boots. I had on brown dress shoes.
where do all you guys live??? I live here in ny long island and im 5ft11 and change and i know alot of people that are 6ft4 and over . Im almost 6ft and it seems where i live im considered short cause around here everyone seems to be at least 6ft2. 6ft2 is the average height around here. All my friends that are 6ft4 give or take there head size, the top of my head comes up to the middle of there nose. My sparring partner tariq is 6ft3 and the top of my head comes up to his forehead. Look at the pic above with me and kane. The top of my head hardly makes it to his mouth and hes slouched with bad posture in the pic. when he first stood straight up before the pic he was standing straight and i was like this guy is an easy 6ft8. He had on black dress shoes. Not even boots. I had on brown dress shoes.
sid said on 3/Mar/09
Rantsrob I still say kane is 6'8 6'8'5, he seemed tall, he dwarfed everyone in the arena, height and weight.. kane is not small man, he did tower over everyone that i saw at the event.
Rantsrob I still say kane is 6'8 6'8'5, he seemed tall, he dwarfed everyone in the arena, height and weight.. kane is not small man, he did tower over everyone that i saw at the event.
Clay said on 3/Mar/09
I can guage up to 6'6-6'7, after thats its a crap-shoot. I have seen some freakin' TALL people before who could have been anywhere from 6'7-6'10.
I can guage up to 6'6-6'7, after thats its a crap-shoot. I have seen some freakin' TALL people before who could have been anywhere from 6'7-6'10.
Rantsrob said on 3/Mar/09
3-4inches is consider'd taller. but once you reach 5-7inches taller to someone you are consider "towerd over". Once you have to tilt your head up consideribly to have a conversation with someone. It becomes very hard to guage ones height imo. The height i can guage is probably 6'4'' after that i usually over estimate an inch or so in real life.
3-4inches is consider'd taller. but once you reach 5-7inches taller to someone you are consider "towerd over". Once you have to tilt your head up consideribly to have a conversation with someone. It becomes very hard to guage ones height imo. The height i can guage is probably 6'4'' after that i usually over estimate an inch or so in real life.
eric 1 said on 3/Mar/09
i have plenty of friends that are 6ft4 and above. So if i see someone like kane for instance i compare him to the heights of my friends. Kane is actually very comparable to a guy that im friends with that is a bouncer. Hes 6ft7 and kane seemed to be taller then him .
i have plenty of friends that are 6ft4 and above. So if i see someone like kane for instance i compare him to the heights of my friends. Kane is actually very comparable to a guy that im friends with that is a bouncer. Hes 6ft7 and kane seemed to be taller then him .
nick said on 3/Mar/09
your right rantsrob. Although you are above average in height and not a small man by any means you still couldnt pin down a man that is around your friends height. Especially when most of the main contributers on this great website are three inches shorter than you or the lower end of average height.
At 20 years old (myself) i actually realized that i encounter people pretty rarely that are 3 to 4 inches taller than myself and im 6'2.5. 6'6 sounds so tall so when i see guys that are a couple of inches taller than me they may actually be near 6'6ers especially since im 6'3.5 in shoes. If i met kane i would definetly be able to tell if he is 6'6 or 6'8 because if he is 6'6 he would be a only a little over three inches taller than me which would feel like he is taller but not towering, however f he is 6'8 legit thats over a 5 inch difference which then is the cut off to feel substantially shorter or just towered. it would be like a a near 5'7 guy with a 6 footer they would feel a lot shorter but a near 5'7 guy with say a 5'10 guy wouldnt feel that much towered over.
your right rantsrob. Although you are above average in height and not a small man by any means you still couldnt pin down a man that is around your friends height. Especially when most of the main contributers on this great website are three inches shorter than you or the lower end of average height.
At 20 years old (myself) i actually realized that i encounter people pretty rarely that are 3 to 4 inches taller than myself and im 6'2.5. 6'6 sounds so tall so when i see guys that are a couple of inches taller than me they may actually be near 6'6ers especially since im 6'3.5 in shoes. If i met kane i would definetly be able to tell if he is 6'6 or 6'8 because if he is 6'6 he would be a only a little over three inches taller than me which would feel like he is taller but not towering, however f he is 6'8 legit thats over a 5 inch difference which then is the cut off to feel substantially shorter or just towered. it would be like a a near 5'7 guy with a 6 footer they would feel a lot shorter but a near 5'7 guy with say a 5'10 guy wouldnt feel that much towered over.
sid said on 2/Mar/09
Rantsrob I can tell from 6'6 from 6'8 no. When I saw kane last month which im still trying to get pics from my friend, then i wil post it on here, he looked 6'8 in street cloth, 6'9 in ring gear, reason why i can tell 6'6 from 6'8 i had a friend who was 6'6 he moved away like 10 years ago.
Rantsrob I can tell from 6'6 from 6'8 no. When I saw kane last month which im still trying to get pics from my friend, then i wil post it on here, he looked 6'8 in street cloth, 6'9 in ring gear, reason why i can tell 6'6 from 6'8 i had a friend who was 6'6 he moved away like 10 years ago.
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.