Add a Comment6937 comments
Average Guess (847 Votes)
6ft 11.93in (213.2cm)
6ft 11.93in (213.2cm)
Frank said on 12/Mar/09
Show is the better athlete but Andre had much more Charisma then Big show will ever have and i feel That the WWE did not use Big Shows Character the way they should
Show is the better athlete but Andre had much more Charisma then Big show will ever have and i feel That the WWE did not use Big Shows Character the way they should
Gretz said on 12/Mar/09
He may have drawn that line a little low,but I don`t think Wahoo comes up to the bottom of Andre`s chin either,somewhere in the middle seems about right.Besides Andre looks a solid 7'0" next to Bobby Hull another 5'10" guy in that photo album.I know Andre has a footware advantage there,but Hull is standing on higher ground evening out that advantage at least somewhat.Still, Andre appears extreamly tall there.
He may have drawn that line a little low,but I don`t think Wahoo comes up to the bottom of Andre`s chin either,somewhere in the middle seems about right.Besides Andre looks a solid 7'0" next to Bobby Hull another 5'10" guy in that photo album.I know Andre has a footware advantage there,but Hull is standing on higher ground evening out that advantage at least somewhat.Still, Andre appears extreamly tall there.
Big Show said on 12/Mar/09
willy79 says on 12/Mar/09
The point is the other day, someone said something about Andre's strength and naturally you were there to put down on his credit because you have some weriod thing to prove Big Show is better than Andre. Everyone knows that Show is by all means a better athlete, by far. However don't try to put Andre down to better Big Show and then get offended when so one dislikes Big Show.
When have I ever put down Andre? I'm a much bigger Andre fan than 99% of the people that visit this board. Or would I really be collecting videos, books etc. of this guy if I didn't like him??? That I don't think he's 7 foot+ or don't believe some of the tall tales that circulate around the net about him is not disrespectful to Andre. The guy had a tremendous career yet there are always people who don't think it was impressive enough and feel the need to exaggerate his accomplishments. Andre was a strong individual (I posted a video a few weeks back from 1972 which showed it), yet I don't believe a tale like him turning a car with 4 people in it upside down, because no one in the world can pull of that feat. A car with 4 people in it weighs a minimum of 2,500 lbs (could be much more). Pulling it off the ground equals a 2,500 lbs RAW deadlift (over 2 times as much as the world record). Yet I discredit Andre for not believing that?
I have no problem when someone dislikes Big Show, that's their opinion. I do however get offended when someone creates false stories just to discredit the guy.
willy79 says on 12/Mar/09
The point is the other day, someone said something about Andre's strength and naturally you were there to put down on his credit because you have some weriod thing to prove Big Show is better than Andre. Everyone knows that Show is by all means a better athlete, by far. However don't try to put Andre down to better Big Show and then get offended when so one dislikes Big Show.
When have I ever put down Andre? I'm a much bigger Andre fan than 99% of the people that visit this board. Or would I really be collecting videos, books etc. of this guy if I didn't like him??? That I don't think he's 7 foot+ or don't believe some of the tall tales that circulate around the net about him is not disrespectful to Andre. The guy had a tremendous career yet there are always people who don't think it was impressive enough and feel the need to exaggerate his accomplishments. Andre was a strong individual (I posted a video a few weeks back from 1972 which showed it), yet I don't believe a tale like him turning a car with 4 people in it upside down, because no one in the world can pull of that feat. A car with 4 people in it weighs a minimum of 2,500 lbs (could be much more). Pulling it off the ground equals a 2,500 lbs RAW deadlift (over 2 times as much as the world record). Yet I discredit Andre for not believing that?
I have no problem when someone dislikes Big Show, that's their opinion. I do however get offended when someone creates false stories just to discredit the guy.
Chris said on 12/Mar/09
I just to meet Jim Duggan last week. I asked him to compare Andre and Paul Wight. His exact response was "Paul's bigger and more athletic in the ring but with Andre that could be a real tough day in the office."
My picture with Duggan is sitting down but when I stood next to him he was probably in the 6'2" range but not taller. Jerry Lawler was also there and he was likely around 5'10"
Chris
Click Here
I just to meet Jim Duggan last week. I asked him to compare Andre and Paul Wight. His exact response was "Paul's bigger and more athletic in the ring but with Andre that could be a real tough day in the office."
My picture with Duggan is sitting down but when I stood next to him he was probably in the 6'2" range but not taller. Jerry Lawler was also there and he was likely around 5'10"
Chris
Click Here
willy79 said on 12/Mar/09
The point is the other day, someone said something about Andre's strength and naturally you were there to put down on his credit because you have some weriod thing to prove Big Show is better than Andre. Everyone knows that Show is by all means a better athlete, by far. However don't try to put Andre down to better Big Show and then get offended when so one dislikes Big Show.
The point is the other day, someone said something about Andre's strength and naturally you were there to put down on his credit because you have some weriod thing to prove Big Show is better than Andre. Everyone knows that Show is by all means a better athlete, by far. However don't try to put Andre down to better Big Show and then get offended when so one dislikes Big Show.
JT said on 12/Mar/09
Plus Vegas, there may be a camera tilt in Andre's favor in the original pic
Click Here I'm surprised Nova did not claim Wahoo was 6'2"; he thinks Mike Graham was up to 5'9" when Barry Windham has more than a head size on him.
In that video of Atlas pressing Bundy, Bundy is much smaller than how he appeared several years later when he re-joined the WWF. I'd put him at around 425 lbs. in the mid 1980s. The guy really was huge all over (not just a big gut like Elmer, etc.).
Plus Vegas, there may be a camera tilt in Andre's favor in the original pic
Click Here I'm surprised Nova did not claim Wahoo was 6'2"; he thinks Mike Graham was up to 5'9" when Barry Windham has more than a head size on him.
In that video of Atlas pressing Bundy, Bundy is much smaller than how he appeared several years later when he re-joined the WWF. I'd put him at around 425 lbs. in the mid 1980s. The guy really was huge all over (not just a big gut like Elmer, etc.).
Big Show said on 12/Mar/09
willy79 says on 10/Mar/09
BTW, I don't hate Big Show, I was just proving a point.
And that point would be
willy79 says on 10/Mar/09
BTW, I don't hate Big Show, I was just proving a point.
And that point would be
Big Show said on 12/Mar/09
Chaz says on 11/Mar/09
well Bundy must have 400lbs,may be even 30st 420lbs at he's biggest but no way 500lbs +,Exagerating is the name of the game in Wrestling,in TNA they keep saying Mat Morgen the 7 footer when it is clear is is not as tall as Nash,who may be down to 6'9.5''now,and he as allways said he is only 6'10''and why when thay had a real 600lbs,Haystacks,thay had to say 700lbs.and Hogan is so used to exagerating i think he belives it himself,that he realy was 6'8''340lbs with 24''arms.
I have a match between Bundy and Giant Baba where they bill Bundy at 450 lbs and Baba at 475 lbs. I thought that was very funny as Bundy was definately much heavier than Baba (who I doubt was anything over 250 lbs).
Bundy at his peak weight I would say was an easy 400 lbs. The guy was big all over.
Chaz says on 11/Mar/09
well Bundy must have 400lbs,may be even 30st 420lbs at he's biggest but no way 500lbs +,Exagerating is the name of the game in Wrestling,in TNA they keep saying Mat Morgen the 7 footer when it is clear is is not as tall as Nash,who may be down to 6'9.5''now,and he as allways said he is only 6'10''and why when thay had a real 600lbs,Haystacks,thay had to say 700lbs.and Hogan is so used to exagerating i think he belives it himself,that he realy was 6'8''340lbs with 24''arms.
I have a match between Bundy and Giant Baba where they bill Bundy at 450 lbs and Baba at 475 lbs. I thought that was very funny as Bundy was definately much heavier than Baba (who I doubt was anything over 250 lbs).
Bundy at his peak weight I would say was an easy 400 lbs. The guy was big all over.
Gretz said on 12/Mar/09
I would just like to point out that there are pics where Andre looks 7'0" tall(IMO).Here`s one next to 5'10" Wahoo McDaniel(Click Here).
I would just like to point out that there are pics where Andre looks 7'0" tall(IMO).Here`s one next to 5'10" Wahoo McDaniel(Click Here).
Danimal said on 11/Mar/09
Bundy at his largest, must have weighed an easy 420-440 pounds. He was 6'4" and HUGE EVERYWHERE. Crazy how they had Hogan billed at 339 pounds in 1980 and Bundy at 348 pounds in 1984. Bundy was WAY MORE than 350 pounds at his height and size.
Bundy at his largest, must have weighed an easy 420-440 pounds. He was 6'4" and HUGE EVERYWHERE. Crazy how they had Hogan billed at 339 pounds in 1980 and Bundy at 348 pounds in 1984. Bundy was WAY MORE than 350 pounds at his height and size.
Chaz said on 11/Mar/09
well Bundy must have 400lbs,may be even 30st 420lbs at he's biggest but no way 500lbs +,Exagerating is the name of the game in Wrestling,in TNA they keep saying Mat Morgen the 7 footer when it is clear is is not as tall as Nash,who may be down to 6'9.5''now,and he as allways said he is only 6'10''and why when thay had a real 600lbs,Haystacks,thay had to say 700lbs.and Hogan is so used to exagerating i think he belives it himself,that he realy was 6'8''340lbs with 24''arms.
well Bundy must have 400lbs,may be even 30st 420lbs at he's biggest but no way 500lbs +,Exagerating is the name of the game in Wrestling,in TNA they keep saying Mat Morgen the 7 footer when it is clear is is not as tall as Nash,who may be down to 6'9.5''now,and he as allways said he is only 6'10''and why when thay had a real 600lbs,Haystacks,thay had to say 700lbs.and Hogan is so used to exagerating i think he belives it himself,that he realy was 6'8''340lbs with 24''arms.
Danimal said on 10/Mar/09
Funny how Vince McMahon called King Kong Bundy 348 pounds, YET, only a couple of years later he was being billed at 458 and 468 pounds. Even as high as 512 pounds at one point. Amazing how much they exagerated his weight by THAT much, because he surely didn't gain over 100 pounds.
Funny how Vince McMahon called King Kong Bundy 348 pounds, YET, only a couple of years later he was being billed at 458 and 468 pounds. Even as high as 512 pounds at one point. Amazing how much they exagerated his weight by THAT much, because he surely didn't gain over 100 pounds.
JT said on 10/Mar/09
Big Show says on 10/Mar/09
....If he's his self-claimed 6'5" is of course hard to tell, but unless I see some evidence that would convince me otherwise, I'll take his word for it.
Graham is with Backlund in this clip and is noticeable taller
Big Show says on 10/Mar/09
....If he's his self-claimed 6'5" is of course hard to tell, but unless I see some evidence that would convince me otherwise, I'll take his word for it.
Graham is with Backlund in this clip and is noticeable taller
Rick said on 10/Mar/09
JT says on 10/Mar/09
Plus, we don't know if Graham is even his self-claimed 6'5". If he is this height (and is not in his socks), Andre looks 6'10" minimum.
I'm assuming the insinuation here is that Graham may be even taller. Since there appears to be about a 5" difference in height, if Graham is actually shorter than 6'5", that would also equate to a much smaller Andre.
JT says on 10/Mar/09
Plus, we don't know if Graham is even his self-claimed 6'5". If he is this height (and is not in his socks), Andre looks 6'10" minimum.
I'm assuming the insinuation here is that Graham may be even taller. Since there appears to be about a 5" difference in height, if Graham is actually shorter than 6'5", that would also equate to a much smaller Andre.
willy79 said on 10/Mar/09
JT says on 9/Mar/09
I've never seen any wrestler perform the feats of raw strength that Big Show has exhibited
Click Here (watch around 6:50 - Konnan is probably at least 230 lbs)
Click Here (watch around 1:30)
Click Here (watch at around 1:45
JT says on 9/Mar/09
I've never seen any wrestler perform the feats of raw strength that Big Show has exhibited
Click Here (watch around 6:50 - Konnan is probably at least 230 lbs)
Click Here (watch around 1:30)
Click Here (watch at around 1:45
willy79 said on 10/Mar/09
Big Show says on 10/Mar/09
Vegas says on 9/Mar/09
who said that?? i never read or heard anybody mention this before you wrote it.
That's just another example of Willy79's hatred for Big Show. Why he even mentioned it here is beyond me. But I guess if you want to dish the Big Show this is the board to do it as many here don't seem to like him very much.
Big Show never chokeslammed Viscera with one hand (at least not on RAW, Smackdown or Heat). Big Show's chokeslams however are the best in the business (at least in his peak years, nowadays they look as crap as the ones from Kane and Undertaker).
Personally I think guys like Brock Lesnar, Goldberg and The British Bulldog performed greater feats of strength than the Big Show did. Also Johnny Stamboli does to Rikishi here at 1:04 Click Here is also impressive.
And this just proves your hero worship of big show! Heck Big Show could hardly choke slam Khali. As far as peak, Big Show used to do horrble shoke slams on Goldberg, Konnan, Hall etcc.... back in WCW too. BTW, I don't hate Big Show, I was just proving a point. Big Show probably is the best giant in wrestling history, even over Andre but at the same token he will never be an Andre the Giant.
Big Show says on 10/Mar/09
Vegas says on 9/Mar/09
who said that?? i never read or heard anybody mention this before you wrote it.
That's just another example of Willy79's hatred for Big Show. Why he even mentioned it here is beyond me. But I guess if you want to dish the Big Show this is the board to do it as many here don't seem to like him very much.
Big Show never chokeslammed Viscera with one hand (at least not on RAW, Smackdown or Heat). Big Show's chokeslams however are the best in the business (at least in his peak years, nowadays they look as crap as the ones from Kane and Undertaker).
Personally I think guys like Brock Lesnar, Goldberg and The British Bulldog performed greater feats of strength than the Big Show did. Also Johnny Stamboli does to Rikishi here at 1:04 Click Here is also impressive.
And this just proves your hero worship of big show! Heck Big Show could hardly choke slam Khali. As far as peak, Big Show used to do horrble shoke slams on Goldberg, Konnan, Hall etcc.... back in WCW too. BTW, I don't hate Big Show, I was just proving a point. Big Show probably is the best giant in wrestling history, even over Andre but at the same token he will never be an Andre the Giant.
Chaz said on 10/Mar/09
realy most of these feats of strenth are not what they seem,even if Rikshi was over 150kg a 150kg jurk from the back is nothing,and it is an old trick,look at Rikish arms he is just pushing himself up off Stamboli'a back,Big Show did the one of the hardest feats I have seen,he push pressed a guy from he's chest up over in to the ring,that takes a lot of real power to do,cos there is no momentum.
realy most of these feats of strenth are not what they seem,even if Rikshi was over 150kg a 150kg jurk from the back is nothing,and it is an old trick,look at Rikish arms he is just pushing himself up off Stamboli'a back,Big Show did the one of the hardest feats I have seen,he push pressed a guy from he's chest up over in to the ring,that takes a lot of real power to do,cos there is no momentum.
Big Show said on 10/Mar/09
Vegas says on 9/Mar/09
who said that?? i never read or heard anybody mention this before you wrote it.
That's just another example of Willy79's hatred for Big Show. Why he even mentioned it here is beyond me. But I guess if you want to dish the Big Show this is the board to do it as many here don't seem to like him very much.
Big Show never chokeslammed Viscera with one hand (at least not on RAW, Smackdown or Heat). Big Show's chokeslams however are the best in the business (at least in his peak years, nowadays they look as crap as the ones from Kane and Undertaker).
Personally I think guys like Brock Lesnar, Goldberg and The British Bulldog performed greater feats of strength than the Big Show did. Also Johnny Stamboli does to Rikishi here at 1:04 Click Here is also impressive.
Vegas says on 9/Mar/09
who said that?? i never read or heard anybody mention this before you wrote it.
That's just another example of Willy79's hatred for Big Show. Why he even mentioned it here is beyond me. But I guess if you want to dish the Big Show this is the board to do it as many here don't seem to like him very much.
Big Show never chokeslammed Viscera with one hand (at least not on RAW, Smackdown or Heat). Big Show's chokeslams however are the best in the business (at least in his peak years, nowadays they look as crap as the ones from Kane and Undertaker).
Personally I think guys like Brock Lesnar, Goldberg and The British Bulldog performed greater feats of strength than the Big Show did. Also Johnny Stamboli does to Rikishi here at 1:04 Click Here is also impressive.
Big Show said on 10/Mar/09
JT says on 10/Mar/09
Plus, we don't know if Graham is even his self-claimed 6'5". If he is this height (and is not in his socks), Andre looks 6'10" minimum.
There's also an interview segment between Graham and Hogan which I would like to get my hands on some day. Hopefully it's a segment where both are standing outside of the ring and not seated like some other interviews Graham did.
If he's his self-claimed 6'5" is of course hard to tell, but unless I see some evidence that would convince me otherwise, I'll take his word for it.
JT says on 10/Mar/09
Plus, we don't know if Graham is even his self-claimed 6'5". If he is this height (and is not in his socks), Andre looks 6'10" minimum.
There's also an interview segment between Graham and Hogan which I would like to get my hands on some day. Hopefully it's a segment where both are standing outside of the ring and not seated like some other interviews Graham did.
If he's his self-claimed 6'5" is of course hard to tell, but unless I see some evidence that would convince me otherwise, I'll take his word for it.
JT said on 10/Mar/09
Big Show says on 9/Mar/09
....On top of that I have trouble seeing a 7 foot Andre next to a 6'5 Dick Graham.
Plus, we don't know if Graham is even his self-claimed 6'5". If he is this height (and is not in his socks), Andre looks 6'10" minimum.
Big Show says on 9/Mar/09
....On top of that I have trouble seeing a 7 foot Andre next to a 6'5 Dick Graham.
Plus, we don't know if Graham is even his self-claimed 6'5". If he is this height (and is not in his socks), Andre looks 6'10" minimum.
JT said on 9/Mar/09
I've never seen any wrestler perform the feats of raw strength that Big Show has exhibited
Click Here (watch around 6:50 - Konnan is probably at least 230 lbs)
Click Here (watch around 1:30)
Click Here (watch at around 1:45
I've never seen any wrestler perform the feats of raw strength that Big Show has exhibited
Click Here (watch around 6:50 - Konnan is probably at least 230 lbs)
Click Here (watch around 1:30)
Click Here (watch at around 1:45
Vegas said on 9/Mar/09
willy79 says on 9/Mar/09
I think it is funny how people talk tall tales on peoples strength. Like Big Show chockslaming Visera and held him up in the air and walked across the ring with one hand. LOL!!!!!
who said that?? i never read or heard anybody mention this before you wrote it.
Mariusz Pudzianowski wouldn't be able to carry out that feat of strength you mentioned, i have seen big show slam viscera multiple times though, he did chokeslam him in 1999 with alot of help from viscera himself
willy79 says on 9/Mar/09
I think it is funny how people talk tall tales on peoples strength. Like Big Show chockslaming Visera and held him up in the air and walked across the ring with one hand. LOL!!!!!
who said that?? i never read or heard anybody mention this before you wrote it.
Mariusz Pudzianowski wouldn't be able to carry out that feat of strength you mentioned, i have seen big show slam viscera multiple times though, he did chokeslam him in 1999 with alot of help from viscera himself
Clay said on 9/Mar/09
It goes 1)Big Show 2)Khali 3)Kane
In order of strength.
It goes 1)Big Show 2)Khali 3)Kane
In order of strength.
Halb said on 9/Mar/09
"I believe Kane is stronger than Show and Khali is for sure"
I would disagree, Kane is too small, and Singh has no leg strength at all.
"I believe Kane is stronger than Show and Khali is for sure"
I would disagree, Kane is too small, and Singh has no leg strength at all.
Big Show said on 9/Mar/09
Click Here
Hogan doesn't seem to be wearing lifts in this match. On top of that I have trouble seeing a 7 foot Andre next to a 6'5 Dick Graham.
Click Here
Hogan doesn't seem to be wearing lifts in this match. On top of that I have trouble seeing a 7 foot Andre next to a 6'5 Dick Graham.
willy79 said on 9/Mar/09
I think it is funny how people talk tall tales on peoples strength. Like Big Show chockslaming Visera and held him up in the air and walked across the ring with one hand. LOL!!!!! Yet he couldn't hardly lift Blue Meanie to choke slam him. I believe Kane is stronger than Show and Khali is for sure.
I think it is funny how people talk tall tales on peoples strength. Like Big Show chockslaming Visera and held him up in the air and walked across the ring with one hand. LOL!!!!! Yet he couldn't hardly lift Blue Meanie to choke slam him. I believe Kane is stronger than Show and Khali is for sure.
mike said on 8/Mar/09
Randy savage is around 6'1" and Andre towered him easily by 10- 12 inches.so i,d have to give andre 6'11"-7'0" max. i,d have to say during the last few years of andre life he had to be somewheres between 6'10" and 7'0".
Randy savage is around 6'1" and Andre towered him easily by 10- 12 inches.so i,d have to give andre 6'11"-7'0" max. i,d have to say during the last few years of andre life he had to be somewheres between 6'10" and 7'0".
Vegas said on 8/Mar/09
Danimal says on 7/Mar/09
I agree with all of this.
you agree with dicksock that hogan wore lifts in wwe to look taller next to andre??
Danimal says on 7/Mar/09
I agree with all of this.
you agree with dicksock that hogan wore lifts in wwe to look taller next to andre??
mike said on 8/Mar/09
andre is 7 foot 5 ,that,s funny,not even close andre was no more than 6,10 maybe 6'11". hogan was around 6,5" and andre only had about 5 inches on him.
andre is 7 foot 5 ,that,s funny,not even close andre was no more than 6,10 maybe 6'11". hogan was around 6,5" and andre only had about 5 inches on him.
dicksock said on 8/Mar/09
Anonymous says on 7/Mar/09
hogan 8 inches on vince lol, that would be nearly a full head, hogan has about 4 inches on vince in that 1980 video
Oh really??!! Pause it at 4:31 and tell me what you see. That goes for everyone on this page. Hogan looks taller next to Vince than the Undertaker.
Anonymous says on 7/Mar/09
hogan 8 inches on vince lol, that would be nearly a full head, hogan has about 4 inches on vince in that 1980 video
Oh really??!! Pause it at 4:31 and tell me what you see. That goes for everyone on this page. Hogan looks taller next to Vince than the Undertaker.
Big Show said on 8/Mar/09
Click Here
Click Here
McMahon comes up to Hogan's eyelevel, which is probably a 4.5-5" height difference. McMahon is in his socks or white slippers, so Hogan has a slight footwear advantage (although that can't be much).
Click Here
Click Here
McMahon comes up to Hogan's eyelevel, which is probably a 4.5-5" height difference. McMahon is in his socks or white slippers, so Hogan has a slight footwear advantage (although that can't be much).
Gretz said on 8/Mar/09
Check from 4:30 to 4:32 of that video,Hogan looks 5 to 5.5 inches taller than MacMahon.So somethings not right,he looks around 6'7" here like in the Greg pic.Lets face it compairing Hogan to anyone is a bad way to estimate that persons height.
Check from 4:30 to 4:32 of that video,Hogan looks 5 to 5.5 inches taller than MacMahon.So somethings not right,he looks around 6'7" here like in the Greg pic.Lets face it compairing Hogan to anyone is a bad way to estimate that persons height.
JT said on 8/Mar/09
Hogan wearing lifts in that video? Then why is Hogan somehow always around 5 inches shorter than Andre (or would be after factoring in Andre
Hogan wearing lifts in that video? Then why is Hogan somehow always around 5 inches shorter than Andre (or would be after factoring in Andre
Danimal said on 7/Mar/09
dicksock says on 7/Mar/09
Does anyone else think that Hogan is most likely wearing lifts in that video? He had about 8" on 6'1.5 Vince McMahon! I think they wanted Hogan to look really big next to Andre to make Hogan seem like a more threatening heel. Look at Hogan and Andre wrestle in Japan. There is a HUGE difference between them. But, if you watch any wwf match between them, they look much closer in height. I also think back to Hogan's book where he broke Kayfabe and said Andre was only 6" taller than him. Why would he have said 6" if it wasn't true? Even if Hogan was 6'7 as he claims, he would've still referred to Andre as "only" 7'1. But if we realize that Hogan was about 6'6 at his peak, that leaves us with a 7'(possibly a little under or over) Andre.
I agree with all of this.
dicksock says on 7/Mar/09
Does anyone else think that Hogan is most likely wearing lifts in that video? He had about 8" on 6'1.5 Vince McMahon! I think they wanted Hogan to look really big next to Andre to make Hogan seem like a more threatening heel. Look at Hogan and Andre wrestle in Japan. There is a HUGE difference between them. But, if you watch any wwf match between them, they look much closer in height. I also think back to Hogan's book where he broke Kayfabe and said Andre was only 6" taller than him. Why would he have said 6" if it wasn't true? Even if Hogan was 6'7 as he claims, he would've still referred to Andre as "only" 7'1. But if we realize that Hogan was about 6'6 at his peak, that leaves us with a 7'(possibly a little under or over) Andre.
I agree with all of this.
Anonymous said on 7/Mar/09
hogan 8 inches on vince lol, that would be nearly a full head, hogan has about 4 inches on vince in that 1980 video
hogan 8 inches on vince lol, that would be nearly a full head, hogan has about 4 inches on vince in that 1980 video
Eric Hughes said on 7/Mar/09
HBK 6'0"
Eric Hughes 6'1"
Undertaker 6'8"
Wrestlemania 25 comes home to our native Houston, go Undertaker! remain undefeated and show him how we do it in Houston.
HBK 6'0"
Eric Hughes 6'1"
Undertaker 6'8"
Wrestlemania 25 comes home to our native Houston, go Undertaker! remain undefeated and show him how we do it in Houston.
Boss said on 7/Mar/09
I think Ronnie Turner is exactly right. He has done more research and has the information from the most legit sources of anyone on this site or the whole internet for that matter. Andre 7' peak 6'9 3/4 at time of death and that's where Meltzer heard of Andre being measured. He estimated Andre at 7' really not 6'11.5 because Wilt was taller than 7' 0.5 he was 7'1 1/16 and Meltzer had no reason or right to downgrade Wilt. So the 7' 0.5 Japan measurement from a source who lived with Andre who seen Andre more than anyone sounds the most legit because he never said 7'4 he said 7'0.5 and 6'9 to 6'10 at the end because of spinal curvature and surgery.
I think Ronnie Turner is exactly right. He has done more research and has the information from the most legit sources of anyone on this site or the whole internet for that matter. Andre 7' peak 6'9 3/4 at time of death and that's where Meltzer heard of Andre being measured. He estimated Andre at 7' really not 6'11.5 because Wilt was taller than 7' 0.5 he was 7'1 1/16 and Meltzer had no reason or right to downgrade Wilt. So the 7' 0.5 Japan measurement from a source who lived with Andre who seen Andre more than anyone sounds the most legit because he never said 7'4 he said 7'0.5 and 6'9 to 6'10 at the end because of spinal curvature and surgery.
dicksock said on 7/Mar/09
Does anyone else think that Hogan is most likely wearing lifts in that video? He had about 8" on 6'1.5 Vince McMahon! I think they wanted Hogan to look really big next to Andre to make Hogan seem like a more threatening heel. Look at Hogan and Andre wrestle in Japan. There is a HUGE difference between them. But, if you watch any wwf match between them, they look much closer in height. I also think back to Hogan's book where he broke Kayfabe and said Andre was only 6" taller than him. Why would he have said 6" if it wasn't true? Even if Hogan was 6'7 as he claims, he would've still referred to Andre as "only" 7'1. But if we realize that Hogan was about 6'6 at his peak, that leaves us with a 7'(possibly a little under or over) Andre.
Does anyone else think that Hogan is most likely wearing lifts in that video? He had about 8" on 6'1.5 Vince McMahon! I think they wanted Hogan to look really big next to Andre to make Hogan seem like a more threatening heel. Look at Hogan and Andre wrestle in Japan. There is a HUGE difference between them. But, if you watch any wwf match between them, they look much closer in height. I also think back to Hogan's book where he broke Kayfabe and said Andre was only 6" taller than him. Why would he have said 6" if it wasn't true? Even if Hogan was 6'7 as he claims, he would've still referred to Andre as "only" 7'1. But if we realize that Hogan was about 6'6 at his peak, that leaves us with a 7'(possibly a little under or over) Andre.
Big Show said on 7/Mar/09
Click Here
Here's a match where Andre the Giant and Haystacks Calhoun team-up together against 2 Japanese wrestlers. Obviously Calhoun is way past his prime here (in the 60's he was incredibly mobile for a guy his size). The match is from 1979 and is one of the rare times that these two big men tagged together.
Click Here
Here's a match where Andre the Giant and Haystacks Calhoun team-up together against 2 Japanese wrestlers. Obviously Calhoun is way past his prime here (in the 60's he was incredibly mobile for a guy his size). The match is from 1979 and is one of the rare times that these two big men tagged together.
KingNick said on 7/Mar/09
I use to think Andre was a 7' peak due to the photos with Wilt Chamberlain. But then Chris found photos where it showed Andre had on cowboy boots when he and Wilt met. Cowboy boots can give up to 3" in height. Now how much height his gave him I can't tell from the photos. But the more staredowns I'm seeing between Andre and Hogan and Andre and Studd, he really looks only around 6'10" to me. Hogan and Studd, IMO, were both around 6'5" - 6'6" each at peak and Andre looked to have no more than 4"-5" on them. On the other hand it was very rare that Andre ever stood up straight. So I really don't know anymore. Tops I would say Andre was 6'11" at peak but he may very well have always been 6'10" as much as I'd hate to admit it.
I use to think Andre was a 7' peak due to the photos with Wilt Chamberlain. But then Chris found photos where it showed Andre had on cowboy boots when he and Wilt met. Cowboy boots can give up to 3" in height. Now how much height his gave him I can't tell from the photos. But the more staredowns I'm seeing between Andre and Hogan and Andre and Studd, he really looks only around 6'10" to me. Hogan and Studd, IMO, were both around 6'5" - 6'6" each at peak and Andre looked to have no more than 4"-5" on them. On the other hand it was very rare that Andre ever stood up straight. So I really don't know anymore. Tops I would say Andre was 6'11" at peak but he may very well have always been 6'10" as much as I'd hate to admit it.
iClarke-93 said on 7/Mar/09
And about 3 years ago Rob had Andre listed at 6'11",then we had a poll to see how many people thought Andre was at one point 7'0".And enough people voted that Andre peaked at 7'0" for Rob to add another half inch and it has been that way ever since.Daminal,JT,and BigShow probably remember this.
We should have another poll.
And about 3 years ago Rob had Andre listed at 6'11",then we had a poll to see how many people thought Andre was at one point 7'0".And enough people voted that Andre peaked at 7'0" for Rob to add another half inch and it has been that way ever since.Daminal,JT,and BigShow probably remember this.
We should have another poll.
JT said on 7/Mar/09
Click Here 15 years and probably 100 lbs. later. Subtract close to an inch from the 1976 Andre since he's wearing cowboy boots. Gene probably lost some height during the interim but not much, as he's only 53 as of 1991.
Click Here 15 years and probably 100 lbs. later. Subtract close to an inch from the 1976 Andre since he's wearing cowboy boots. Gene probably lost some height during the interim but not much, as he's only 53 as of 1991.
Gretz said on 6/Mar/09
Big Show,I have to disagree about no height loss for Andre by 1980,he was already 34 years old.I wouldn`t be shocked if a 23 year old Andre, perhaps 100 lbs. lighter and 10 less years of being worn down in the ring,would be a half inch or so taller,although I admit its pure speculation.Also,Andre`s footwear was so thin at the time that Hogan`s boots(which looked about an inch or so thick at shea,probably the same from the video)would gain him a half inch on Andre.
Big Show,I have to disagree about no height loss for Andre by 1980,he was already 34 years old.I wouldn`t be shocked if a 23 year old Andre, perhaps 100 lbs. lighter and 10 less years of being worn down in the ring,would be a half inch or so taller,although I admit its pure speculation.Also,Andre`s footwear was so thin at the time that Hogan`s boots(which looked about an inch or so thick at shea,probably the same from the video)would gain him a half inch on Andre.
Gretz said on 6/Mar/09
Andre is is looking down in both those pics JT,so its not really a good comparison.If you pause it at the very beginning of the video,when he is looking straight ahead next to McMahon,he looks at least close to 7'0"there IMO. And about 3 years ago Rob had Andre listed at 6'11",then we had a poll to see how many people thought Andre was at one point 7'0".And enough people voted that Andre peaked at 7'0" for Rob to add another half inch and it has been that way ever since.Daminal,JT,and BigShow probably remember this.
Andre is is looking down in both those pics JT,so its not really a good comparison.If you pause it at the very beginning of the video,when he is looking straight ahead next to McMahon,he looks at least close to 7'0"there IMO. And about 3 years ago Rob had Andre listed at 6'11",then we had a poll to see how many people thought Andre was at one point 7'0".And enough people voted that Andre peaked at 7'0" for Rob to add another half inch and it has been that way ever since.Daminal,JT,and BigShow probably remember this.
mike said on 6/Mar/09
i agree with andre at 6'10" he looks shy of seven feet imo.Gene okerlund is only 5'8" i believe and andre has a tad over a foot on him.
i agree with andre at 6'10" he looks shy of seven feet imo.Gene okerlund is only 5'8" i believe and andre has a tad over a foot on him.
Danimal said on 6/Mar/09
miko says on 6/Mar/09
In JT's pics Hogan is looking huge. Andre at 6"10.5 and Hogan at 6"6 seems to be what most photo's show from the mid-80's. When Andre was in his cowboy boys it could look a bigger gap.
Andre had 10" on Vince throughout that interview.
miko says on 6/Mar/09
In JT's pics Hogan is looking huge. Andre at 6"10.5 and Hogan at 6"6 seems to be what most photo's show from the mid-80's. When Andre was in his cowboy boys it could look a bigger gap.
Andre had 10" on Vince throughout that interview.
miko said on 6/Mar/09
In JT's pics Hogan is looking huge. Andre at 6"10.5 and Hogan at 6"6 seems to be what most photo's show from the mid-80's. When Andre was in his cowboy boys it could look a bigger gap.
In JT's pics Hogan is looking huge. Andre at 6"10.5 and Hogan at 6"6 seems to be what most photo's show from the mid-80's. When Andre was in his cowboy boys it could look a bigger gap.
JT said on 6/Mar/09
These photos are from that same encounter between Andre and Hogan:
Click Here (I even straightened the pic in Andre
These photos are from that same encounter between Andre and Hogan:
Click Here (I even straightened the pic in Andre
Halb said on 6/Mar/09
"What proof is being used to support the current estimate?"
Robs estimation based on most of the pictures of him and videos, alongside input from a lot of posters? Although I do think it should be dropped by
"What proof is being used to support the current estimate?"
Robs estimation based on most of the pictures of him and videos, alongside input from a lot of posters? Although I do think it should be dropped by
Big Show said on 6/Mar/09
iClarke-93 says on 5/Mar/09
Halb , there has been plenty of posts that proves Andre was a strong 7 ft at is peak. Here are 2;
Click Here
Click Here
That first video with Hogan shows Andre isn't 7 ft let alone a strong 7 ft. The top of Hogan's head is just above Andre's eye-level. So I'd say a 4.5-5" difference.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
This video is from 1980 so no height loss for Andre here. Both have good posture and comparable footwear as well.
iClarke-93 says on 5/Mar/09
Halb , there has been plenty of posts that proves Andre was a strong 7 ft at is peak. Here are 2;
Click Here
Click Here
That first video with Hogan shows Andre isn't 7 ft let alone a strong 7 ft. The top of Hogan's head is just above Andre's eye-level. So I'd say a 4.5-5" difference.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
This video is from 1980 so no height loss for Andre here. Both have good posture and comparable footwear as well.
Rick said on 5/Mar/09
Ghost says on 5/Mar/09
Halb says on 4/Mar/09
"will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm)"
It will only read that with proof, which hasn't appeared yet.
What proof is being used to support the current estimate?
Ghost says on 5/Mar/09
Halb says on 4/Mar/09
"will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm)"
It will only read that with proof, which hasn't appeared yet.
What proof is being used to support the current estimate?
iClarke-93 said on 5/Mar/09
Halb , there has been plenty of posts that proves Andre was a strong 7 ft at is peak.
Here are 2;
Click Here
Click Here
Halb , there has been plenty of posts that proves Andre was a strong 7 ft at is peak.
Here are 2;
Click Here
Click Here
KingNick said on 5/Mar/09
general93 says on 4/Mar/09
i watched royal rumble 89 just now andre was good in that match and dominated it. i dont understand that comment danimal i dont think he fell that much at-all.also at the end theres some good close ups of akeem and studd if anything studd was slightly taller but ted diabiese didnt look that much shorter than them.this also throws out claims of 6'4.5" john studd.
you ever see his matches from the early 80s? There's an Andre the Giant DVD the WWE released a few years ago with around 10 matches or show of him from the early 80s. I'm sure he looked good in the video he saw, but you'd be amazed at how quick he was when he was younger and less heavy. The dude would wrestle like three guys at the same time. I can tell you're a big wrestling fan, you would love the DVD
general93 says on 4/Mar/09
i watched royal rumble 89 just now andre was good in that match and dominated it. i dont understand that comment danimal i dont think he fell that much at-all.also at the end theres some good close ups of akeem and studd if anything studd was slightly taller but ted diabiese didnt look that much shorter than them.this also throws out claims of 6'4.5" john studd.
you ever see his matches from the early 80s? There's an Andre the Giant DVD the WWE released a few years ago with around 10 matches or show of him from the early 80s. I'm sure he looked good in the video he saw, but you'd be amazed at how quick he was when he was younger and less heavy. The dude would wrestle like three guys at the same time. I can tell you're a big wrestling fan, you would love the DVD
Ghost said on 5/Mar/09
Halb says on 4/Mar/09
"will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm)"
It will only read that with proof, which hasn't appeared yet.
Ghost, you think it was that much? When do you think it occurred?
It was probably even less, like 1,5 inches or even just one. Hard to say when, maybe the early 80s?
Halb says on 4/Mar/09
"will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm)"
It will only read that with proof, which hasn't appeared yet.
Ghost, you think it was that much? When do you think it occurred?
It was probably even less, like 1,5 inches or even just one. Hard to say when, maybe the early 80s?
Danimal said on 4/Mar/09
Anonymous says on 3/Mar/09
whatever happened to these alleged posters? I believe they were 6'3" Kendra, 7'0" George and 7'1" Jeremy? Are they still coming on to brag that Jeremy would be taller than the early 90's Andre? those three need to get a life
Hi Kendra, George and Jeremy. Has your mother let you back onto the computer for good behavior? ;)
Anonymous says on 3/Mar/09
whatever happened to these alleged posters? I believe they were 6'3" Kendra, 7'0" George and 7'1" Jeremy? Are they still coming on to brag that Jeremy would be taller than the early 90's Andre? those three need to get a life
Hi Kendra, George and Jeremy. Has your mother let you back onto the computer for good behavior? ;)
general93 said on 4/Mar/09
i watched royal rumble 89 just now andre was good in that match and dominated it. i dont understand that comment danimal i dont think he fell that much at-all.also at the end theres some good close ups of akeem and studd if anything studd was slightly taller but ted diabiese didnt look that much shorter than them.this also throws out claims of 6'4.5" john studd.
i watched royal rumble 89 just now andre was good in that match and dominated it. i dont understand that comment danimal i dont think he fell that much at-all.also at the end theres some good close ups of akeem and studd if anything studd was slightly taller but ted diabiese didnt look that much shorter than them.this also throws out claims of 6'4.5" john studd.
Halb said on 4/Mar/09
"will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm)"
It will only read that with proof, which hasn't appeared yet.
Ghost, you think it was that much? When do you think it occurred?
"will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm)"
It will only read that with proof, which hasn't appeared yet.
Ghost, you think it was that much? When do you think it occurred?
Ghost said on 4/Mar/09
Many pics have proven that Andre didn't loose as much as 3 inches of height,
MAX 2.
Many pics have proven that Andre didn't loose as much as 3 inches of height,
MAX 2.
iClarke-93 said on 4/Mar/09
Hopefully one of these days at the top of the page it will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm) , and most people on this page believe that he was this height at his peak. How people can still claim he was 6'10 peak is ridiculous.
Hopefully one of these days at the top of the page it will read "Andre The Giant's height is 7ft.25 (213cm) , and most people on this page believe that he was this height at his peak. How people can still claim he was 6'10 peak is ridiculous.
Halb said on 4/Mar/09
That would give more than 3 inches height loss.Which I have not seen on the pics on this board.
The heights won't get changed without primary source proof. Meltzer uncovered a 6'9
That would give more than 3 inches height loss.Which I have not seen on the pics on this board.
The heights won't get changed without primary source proof. Meltzer uncovered a 6'9
Big Show said on 4/Mar/09
Ronnie Russell says on 4/Mar/09
seriously, i think based on the evidence i gathered in NC and from photographic evidence, andre's peak height can be adjusted to 7'0.25" for sure
he was measured by a RELIABLE source in japan at age 22, at 7'0.5", so that canadian billed height of 7'0.25" is believable, IMO
and after reading my post below, some of it wasnt well written and certain pronouns seem to point to the wrong objects. for the record, Jesse said Hogan was only an inch taller than he was when they were barefoot, and jess said he was 6'4.5", so that would put hogan at 6'5.5", and he also said he had first hand knowledge of hogan wearing 1.5inch lifts in his boots( i believe this to be true, as hogan is all about the kayfabe)
how do we get the moderator of this thread to change the official peak height to 7'0.25", and height at time of death to be 6'9"-6'10"?
Andre was billed 7'4 in Canada from the get-go. They've never billed him at 7'0.25" as far as I know of.
Click Here
Without verifying that RELIABLE source in Japan, it holds as much water as Meltzer's claim of Andre being measured 6'9.75" at age 24 in France.
Andre didn't go to Japan before 1970 (when he was 23), so how could he have been measured there at age 22?
Ronnie Russell says on 4/Mar/09
seriously, i think based on the evidence i gathered in NC and from photographic evidence, andre's peak height can be adjusted to 7'0.25" for sure
he was measured by a RELIABLE source in japan at age 22, at 7'0.5", so that canadian billed height of 7'0.25" is believable, IMO
and after reading my post below, some of it wasnt well written and certain pronouns seem to point to the wrong objects. for the record, Jesse said Hogan was only an inch taller than he was when they were barefoot, and jess said he was 6'4.5", so that would put hogan at 6'5.5", and he also said he had first hand knowledge of hogan wearing 1.5inch lifts in his boots( i believe this to be true, as hogan is all about the kayfabe)
how do we get the moderator of this thread to change the official peak height to 7'0.25", and height at time of death to be 6'9"-6'10"?
Andre was billed 7'4 in Canada from the get-go. They've never billed him at 7'0.25" as far as I know of.
Click Here
Without verifying that RELIABLE source in Japan, it holds as much water as Meltzer's claim of Andre being measured 6'9.75" at age 24 in France.
Andre didn't go to Japan before 1970 (when he was 23), so how could he have been measured there at age 22?
Ronnie Russell said on 4/Mar/09
seriously, i think based on the evidence i gathered in NC and from photographic evidence, andre's peak height can be adjusted to 7'0.25" for sure
he was measured by a RELIABLE source in japan at age 22, at 7'0.5", so that canadian billed height of 7'0.25" is believable, IMO
and after reading my post below, some of it wasnt well written and certain pronouns seem to point to the wrong objects. for the record, Jesse said Hogan was only an inch taller than he was when they were barefoot, and jess said he was 6'4.5", so that would put hogan at 6'5.5", and he also said he had first hand knowledge of hogan wearing 1.5inch lifts in his boots( i believe this to be true, as hogan is all about the kayfabe)
how do we get the moderator of this thread to change the official peak height to 7'0.25", and height at time of death to be 6'9"-6'10"?
seriously, i think based on the evidence i gathered in NC and from photographic evidence, andre's peak height can be adjusted to 7'0.25" for sure
he was measured by a RELIABLE source in japan at age 22, at 7'0.5", so that canadian billed height of 7'0.25" is believable, IMO
and after reading my post below, some of it wasnt well written and certain pronouns seem to point to the wrong objects. for the record, Jesse said Hogan was only an inch taller than he was when they were barefoot, and jess said he was 6'4.5", so that would put hogan at 6'5.5", and he also said he had first hand knowledge of hogan wearing 1.5inch lifts in his boots( i believe this to be true, as hogan is all about the kayfabe)
how do we get the moderator of this thread to change the official peak height to 7'0.25", and height at time of death to be 6'9"-6'10"?
Gretz said on 3/Mar/09
In the new book about Andre,(by Michael Krugman-Andre The Giant A Legendary Life)it dosen`t give an exact date,but it says.Immediately after The Princess Bride wrapped production,Andre finally took measures to deal with his agonizing back pain and booked a major spinal surgery at London`s Cromwell Hospital.However,the first interview he gave with Gary Davie from London indicating he was ready to return to the ring was on nov.29,1986.By the way he was still wrestling as Giant Machine part time while filming Princess Bride,and the surgery invoved widening his spine.
In the new book about Andre,(by Michael Krugman-Andre The Giant A Legendary Life)it dosen`t give an exact date,but it says.Immediately after The Princess Bride wrapped production,Andre finally took measures to deal with his agonizing back pain and booked a major spinal surgery at London`s Cromwell Hospital.However,the first interview he gave with Gary Davie from London indicating he was ready to return to the ring was on nov.29,1986.By the way he was still wrestling as Giant Machine part time while filming Princess Bride,and the surgery invoved widening his spine.
JT said on 3/Mar/09
Here's the original pic of Nash and Giant Gonzalez that Chris had posted here a few years ago: Click Here As Nash was probably around 300 lbs. there, Gonzalez looks at least 400 lbs., which was his b-ball playing weight.
Here's the original pic of Nash and Giant Gonzalez that Chris had posted here a few years ago: Click Here As Nash was probably around 300 lbs. there, Gonzalez looks at least 400 lbs., which was his b-ball playing weight.
KingNick said on 3/Mar/09
Halb says on 3/Mar/09
Powerslam say's Hogan's autobiog is a mix of fiction and fact, and he himself prolly can't actually differentiate between the two anymore:D
You do make a great point with that. I heard Hogan say in his E! autobiography that him bodyslamming Andre was in the moment. In other words, Andre asked him at the end of the match to bodyslam him with Hogan having no prior knowledge. In Hogan's book, he claims that Vince asked him to lay the whole match out beforehand, including the bodyslam. Hogan also referred to everyone by their kayfabe height in the book, saying Undertaker was 6'10".
So again, take it with a grain of salt. But I do believe the Princess Bride information to be true.
Halb says on 3/Mar/09
Powerslam say's Hogan's autobiog is a mix of fiction and fact, and he himself prolly can't actually differentiate between the two anymore:D
You do make a great point with that. I heard Hogan say in his E! autobiography that him bodyslamming Andre was in the moment. In other words, Andre asked him at the end of the match to bodyslam him with Hogan having no prior knowledge. In Hogan's book, he claims that Vince asked him to lay the whole match out beforehand, including the bodyslam. Hogan also referred to everyone by their kayfabe height in the book, saying Undertaker was 6'10".
So again, take it with a grain of salt. But I do believe the Princess Bride information to be true.
Anonymous said on 3/Mar/09
whatever happened to these alleged posters? I believe they were 6'3" Kendra, 7'0" George and 7'1" Jeremy? Are they still coming on to brag that Jeremy would be taller than the early 90's Andre? those three need to get a life.
whatever happened to these alleged posters? I believe they were 6'3" Kendra, 7'0" George and 7'1" Jeremy? Are they still coming on to brag that Jeremy would be taller than the early 90's Andre? those three need to get a life.
Clay said on 3/Mar/09
He was a lot taller, BUT A LOT smaller than either Khali or Big Show. Gonzalez had the height but he didn't have the physique, hell they made him wear a muscle bodysuit, hah.
He was a lot taller, BUT A LOT smaller than either Khali or Big Show. Gonzalez had the height but he didn't have the physique, hell they made him wear a muscle bodysuit, hah.
Danimal said on 3/Mar/09
Hogan stated that Andre was in a lot of pain during their WMIII match and that Andre had to undergo back surgery after the match. SO, what I believe is that Andre had minor back surgery in 1986 and MAJOR back surgery in 1987. By 1988-1989 the littlest tap by another wrestler would put him off balance and he would fall to the mat and then trying to get up from the lying position was hard to watch. He would crawl to the ropes and pull himself up from there. Just watch Royal Rumble 1989. He was a MESS during that match. He kept falling down when someone would tap him. There was a time where NO ONE could get Andre off his feet and Andre used to run around that ring chasing people. Anyways, I believe he had 2 back surgeries: one in 1986 and one in 1987. We know he had major knee surgery in the early 1990's and was in even worse shape by then, needing walking crutches. He was a severely crippled man by the age of 40.
Hogan stated that Andre was in a lot of pain during their WMIII match and that Andre had to undergo back surgery after the match. SO, what I believe is that Andre had minor back surgery in 1986 and MAJOR back surgery in 1987. By 1988-1989 the littlest tap by another wrestler would put him off balance and he would fall to the mat and then trying to get up from the lying position was hard to watch. He would crawl to the ropes and pull himself up from there. Just watch Royal Rumble 1989. He was a MESS during that match. He kept falling down when someone would tap him. There was a time where NO ONE could get Andre off his feet and Andre used to run around that ring chasing people. Anyways, I believe he had 2 back surgeries: one in 1986 and one in 1987. We know he had major knee surgery in the early 1990's and was in even worse shape by then, needing walking crutches. He was a severely crippled man by the age of 40.
Halb said on 3/Mar/09
Powerslam say's Hogan's autobiog is a mix of fiction and fact, and he himself prolly can't actually differentiate between the two anymore:D
Powerslam say's Hogan's autobiog is a mix of fiction and fact, and he himself prolly can't actually differentiate between the two anymore:D
Big Show said on 3/Mar/09
KingNick says on 2/Mar/09
On the extras on the Princess Bride DVD, the cast talks about how Andre couldn't lift Cary Elwes or even Robin Wright Penn because his back was so bad. In the scene where Westly is on the Fezzik's back, the distant shots were of Andre's stuntman and the close up shots actually had Elwes on something like a wheelbarrow so Andre wouldn't have to lift him. Towards the end of the film, Andre catches Robin Wright as she jumps off the castle. They actually had her on wires because, again, Andre's back was so bad.
By WM3, Andre was bodyslamming a 300lb Hogan with ease. So I'm sure he had the surgery sometime between the end of Princess Bride and WM3. Keep in mind Andre rarely left his feet during matches. He could have had very little time off and when he wrestled he just never took a bump.
That Andre's back was in bad shape was no secret. I
KingNick says on 2/Mar/09
On the extras on the Princess Bride DVD, the cast talks about how Andre couldn't lift Cary Elwes or even Robin Wright Penn because his back was so bad. In the scene where Westly is on the Fezzik's back, the distant shots were of Andre's stuntman and the close up shots actually had Elwes on something like a wheelbarrow so Andre wouldn't have to lift him. Towards the end of the film, Andre catches Robin Wright as she jumps off the castle. They actually had her on wires because, again, Andre's back was so bad.
By WM3, Andre was bodyslamming a 300lb Hogan with ease. So I'm sure he had the surgery sometime between the end of Princess Bride and WM3. Keep in mind Andre rarely left his feet during matches. He could have had very little time off and when he wrestled he just never took a bump.
That Andre's back was in bad shape was no secret. I
Ghost said on 3/Mar/09
Chaz says on 2/Mar/09
As I have said befor,if Kali,Big Show and Andre was in a line Gonzalaz at the back,he could look over all there heads,there at best 6''shorter then him,and in human height terms thats a lot,
Well Gonzales was 7'6 in his wrestling years, so he would be about 5 inches taller than Khali.
Gonzales was pretty much the only wrestler who looked like an absolute towering giant next to anybody. Too bad he wasn't much of a wrestler.
Chaz says on 2/Mar/09
As I have said befor,if Kali,Big Show and Andre was in a line Gonzalaz at the back,he could look over all there heads,there at best 6''shorter then him,and in human height terms thats a lot,
Well Gonzales was 7'6 in his wrestling years, so he would be about 5 inches taller than Khali.
Gonzales was pretty much the only wrestler who looked like an absolute towering giant next to anybody. Too bad he wasn't much of a wrestler.
KingNick said on 2/Mar/09
On the extras on the Princess Bride DVD, the cast talks about how Andre couldn't lift Cary Elwes or even Robin Wright Penn because his back was so bad. In the scene where Westly is on the Fezzik's back, the distant shots were of Andre's stuntman and the close up shots actually had Elwes on something like a wheelbarrow so Andre wouldn't have to lift him. Towards the end of the film, Andre catches Robin Wright as she jumps off the castle. They actually had her on wires because, again, Andre's back was so bad.
By WM3, Andre was bodyslamming a 300lb Hogan with ease. So I'm sure he had the surgery sometime between the end of Princess Bride and WM3. Keep in mind Andre rarely left his feet during matches. He could have had very little time off and when he wrestled he just never took a bump.
With the wine thing, I honestly don't know if this is true or not, but I'll relay what Hulk Hogan wrote in his autobiography. Sometime in the early 80s when they were touring Japan, Hogan gave Andre a case of wine, I think six bottles I'd have to look it up, as a present. He apparently drank the entire case on a bus ride and wrestled that same night no problem. Again, I don't know if that's true or not, but that's the story he told.
On the extras on the Princess Bride DVD, the cast talks about how Andre couldn't lift Cary Elwes or even Robin Wright Penn because his back was so bad. In the scene where Westly is on the Fezzik's back, the distant shots were of Andre's stuntman and the close up shots actually had Elwes on something like a wheelbarrow so Andre wouldn't have to lift him. Towards the end of the film, Andre catches Robin Wright as she jumps off the castle. They actually had her on wires because, again, Andre's back was so bad.
By WM3, Andre was bodyslamming a 300lb Hogan with ease. So I'm sure he had the surgery sometime between the end of Princess Bride and WM3. Keep in mind Andre rarely left his feet during matches. He could have had very little time off and when he wrestled he just never took a bump.
With the wine thing, I honestly don't know if this is true or not, but I'll relay what Hulk Hogan wrote in his autobiography. Sometime in the early 80s when they were touring Japan, Hogan gave Andre a case of wine, I think six bottles I'd have to look it up, as a present. He apparently drank the entire case on a bus ride and wrestled that same night no problem. Again, I don't know if that's true or not, but that's the story he told.
R Miller said on 2/Mar/09
Photos can give as much misleading information as they are helpful. Without the proper skills and knowledge to determine the size of objects or people in photographs, one can easily be fooled. Surrounding objects or people are helpful to determine size, but an individual can not and should not rely on such information. A classic case of this is perfectly demonstraated in 2 graphic images of Leonid Stadnik with his mother standing next to him. Photo A shows Mr. Stadnik standing in a gateway with his mother only a foot or so, next to him. Photo B shows Mr. Stadnik standing agaist a brick wall holding a measuring tape while his mother is standing about a foot or so, next to him. Maybe you have seen these photos. In both photos, both people appear to be stand relatively straight. Reports state that his mother is 60 inches tall. Based on the scale of his mother's height being 5 feet, Stadnik scales out to be over 8 feet in photo A and less than 8 feet in photo B. Such is a perfect example of how photos can be misleading. The same is true of course in many photos of Andre. There seems to be a lot of skeptics out there in regards to the true height of Leonid Stadnik. Ukraine records list Stadnik at over 8 feet.
I do not believe that Mr. Stadnik attempted to mislead anyone. His true height at this period of time is yet to be determined. There is quite a difference in a man that is 8'5" and a man that is 7'6". I find it hard to believe also that Ukraine record keepers could have made such a huge blunder. I will take a look at the images of Leonid Stadnik when more graphic images become available. BUT, I kid you not......Do not be surprised if one of these days GWR measures this man to be in excess of 8 feet. The photo of him standing in the gateway indicates that he is.......more images are needed.
Photos can give as much misleading information as they are helpful. Without the proper skills and knowledge to determine the size of objects or people in photographs, one can easily be fooled. Surrounding objects or people are helpful to determine size, but an individual can not and should not rely on such information. A classic case of this is perfectly demonstraated in 2 graphic images of Leonid Stadnik with his mother standing next to him. Photo A shows Mr. Stadnik standing in a gateway with his mother only a foot or so, next to him. Photo B shows Mr. Stadnik standing agaist a brick wall holding a measuring tape while his mother is standing about a foot or so, next to him. Maybe you have seen these photos. In both photos, both people appear to be stand relatively straight. Reports state that his mother is 60 inches tall. Based on the scale of his mother's height being 5 feet, Stadnik scales out to be over 8 feet in photo A and less than 8 feet in photo B. Such is a perfect example of how photos can be misleading. The same is true of course in many photos of Andre. There seems to be a lot of skeptics out there in regards to the true height of Leonid Stadnik. Ukraine records list Stadnik at over 8 feet.
I do not believe that Mr. Stadnik attempted to mislead anyone. His true height at this period of time is yet to be determined. There is quite a difference in a man that is 8'5" and a man that is 7'6". I find it hard to believe also that Ukraine record keepers could have made such a huge blunder. I will take a look at the images of Leonid Stadnik when more graphic images become available. BUT, I kid you not......Do not be surprised if one of these days GWR measures this man to be in excess of 8 feet. The photo of him standing in the gateway indicates that he is.......more images are needed.
Halb said on 2/Mar/09
"Andre was only out of wrestling for 6 weeks in 1986 between Late June and Mid-August, which is hardly long enough to undergo a major back surgery and recover from it as well. In September he started filming The Princess Bride, and I doubt he would have back surgery during filming, as it could delay the entire movie if the recovery process didn't go as planned.
So I highly doubt Andre had major back surgery in 1986. Looks more like he had it in 1987 when he was out of wrestling for 4 months. Still not a long time to recover from back surgery."
Andre had surgery in 1986. It was before WM3.
Click Here
"Andre was only out of wrestling for 6 weeks in 1986 between Late June and Mid-August, which is hardly long enough to undergo a major back surgery and recover from it as well. In September he started filming The Princess Bride, and I doubt he would have back surgery during filming, as it could delay the entire movie if the recovery process didn't go as planned.
So I highly doubt Andre had major back surgery in 1986. Looks more like he had it in 1987 when he was out of wrestling for 4 months. Still not a long time to recover from back surgery."
Andre had surgery in 1986. It was before WM3.
Click Here
Chaz said on 2/Mar/09
As I have said befor,if Kali,Big Show and Andre was in a line Gonzalaz at the back,he could look over all there heads,there at best 6''shorter then him,and in human height terms thats a lot,
As I have said befor,if Kali,Big Show and Andre was in a line Gonzalaz at the back,he could look over all there heads,there at best 6''shorter then him,and in human height terms thats a lot,
Vegas said on 2/Mar/09
Rusty says on 2/Mar/09
Vegas - Do you have the WCW Mag with the article regarding a TV Episode El Gigante and Oz (Nash) appeared in? I remember seeing it years ago and there are a few pics of them standing side by side.
i don't have it but Chris posted a pic of nash and gonzales side by side in 1991 and JT kept it handy Click Here
Rusty says on 2/Mar/09
Vegas - Do you have the WCW Mag with the article regarding a TV Episode El Gigante and Oz (Nash) appeared in? I remember seeing it years ago and there are a few pics of them standing side by side.
i don't have it but Chris posted a pic of nash and gonzales side by side in 1991 and JT kept it handy Click Here
Halb said on 2/Mar/09
I had a PWI issue where they were both in it, I was amzed at how Jorge made Kev look very small.
I had a PWI issue where they were both in it, I was amzed at how Jorge made Kev look very small.
Rusty said on 2/Mar/09
Vegas - Do you have the WCW Mag with the article regarding a TV Episode El Gigante and Oz (Nash) appeared in? I remember seeing it years ago and there are a few pics of them standing side by side.
Vegas - Do you have the WCW Mag with the article regarding a TV Episode El Gigante and Oz (Nash) appeared in? I remember seeing it years ago and there are a few pics of them standing side by side.
Boss said on 1/Mar/09
Fralic looks shorter than Big John Studd in that interview with Mean Gean until when Fralic stands on his tip toes to be the same height as Studd. Studd was 6'7 and was billed as 6'10.
Fralic looks shorter than Big John Studd in that interview with Mean Gean until when Fralic stands on his tip toes to be the same height as Studd. Studd was 6'7 and was billed as 6'10.
R Miller said on 1/Mar/09
Dear... Big Show......When I stated that the GWR listing of Leonid Stadnik was good enough for me, I was not aware that he had lost his title. Secondly..I have only seen one photo of Stadnik and that was I believe, from the waist up. I was not interested enough to look at any more. Third...CREDIBILITY is a word that is used when an individual has factually earned his or her position in their careers. I have earned that description.
Fourth.....I have never applied my skills and knowledge in the direction of Stadnik, but one of these days......you never know! Fifth.......You plain and simply can't beat science. Sixth....I can see why you refer to yourself as....The Big Show!
Dear... Big Show......When I stated that the GWR listing of Leonid Stadnik was good enough for me, I was not aware that he had lost his title. Secondly..I have only seen one photo of Stadnik and that was I believe, from the waist up. I was not interested enough to look at any more. Third...CREDIBILITY is a word that is used when an individual has factually earned his or her position in their careers. I have earned that description.
Fourth.....I have never applied my skills and knowledge in the direction of Stadnik, but one of these days......you never know! Fifth.......You plain and simply can't beat science. Sixth....I can see why you refer to yourself as....The Big Show!
Big Show said on 28/Feb/09
iClarke-93 says on 27/Feb/09
I'm starting to think Andre lost 1" max after his back surgery in March 1987. He still looked very near 7foot at 1987 Survivor Series and even into 1988 he looked 6'11.
If he lost any height due to his back surgery in 1987 it means he already lost it by the time Survivor Series took place. Survivor Series is one of the WWE's final PPV's of the year and 1987 (the first year it took place) was no exception. Andre had back surgery probably in early May 1987 and came back to the WWE in August (he was out for nearly 4 months).
iClarke-93 says on 27/Feb/09
I'm starting to think Andre lost 1" max after his back surgery in March 1987. He still looked very near 7foot at 1987 Survivor Series and even into 1988 he looked 6'11.
If he lost any height due to his back surgery in 1987 it means he already lost it by the time Survivor Series took place. Survivor Series is one of the WWE's final PPV's of the year and 1987 (the first year it took place) was no exception. Andre had back surgery probably in early May 1987 and came back to the WWE in August (he was out for nearly 4 months).
Vegas said on 28/Feb/09
Chris says on 27/Feb/09
On the subject of Kevin Nash, when he first started with WCW as "Master Blaster Steel" he was referred to as 7ft. In a couple of shoot interviews, he has referred to himself as 6'10.
jim ross described nash as 6'10 300lb when he debuted in wcw Click Here
willy79 is correct nash was listed at 7'1 in wcw when he went back, i have all the wcw magazines from 1996 and a number give nash's stats at 7'1
Big Show is also correct, in 1998 during a match against Paul "the giant" Wight nash is introduced as 6'10 by michael buffer, wight was still introduced as 7'4 but in the staredown there is only 2-3 inches difference
Chris says on 27/Feb/09
On the subject of Kevin Nash, when he first started with WCW as "Master Blaster Steel" he was referred to as 7ft. In a couple of shoot interviews, he has referred to himself as 6'10.
jim ross described nash as 6'10 300lb when he debuted in wcw Click Here
willy79 is correct nash was listed at 7'1 in wcw when he went back, i have all the wcw magazines from 1996 and a number give nash's stats at 7'1
Big Show is also correct, in 1998 during a match against Paul "the giant" Wight nash is introduced as 6'10 by michael buffer, wight was still introduced as 7'4 but in the staredown there is only 2-3 inches difference
general93 said on 28/Feb/09
andre the giant lost close to 3" in height due back surgery bad posture crippling knees and weight.they shouldnt have billed 7'5" at wm3.he was billed 7'4" most the time because in the 70s he was about 7'2".giving him an extra 2" like most wrestlers back then.he was given 7'6" in some matches in canada i belive.i mean u can see the height loss even from wm2 to 3 is somewhat 2" in my estimation.then wm5 were both studd and andre lost height due to illness studd has a max 2" on 6'5" jake roberts and andre has about 4" on studd.so id say andres tallest around the 7'2" mark late 6'11".
andre the giant lost close to 3" in height due back surgery bad posture crippling knees and weight.they shouldnt have billed 7'5" at wm3.he was billed 7'4" most the time because in the 70s he was about 7'2".giving him an extra 2" like most wrestlers back then.he was given 7'6" in some matches in canada i belive.i mean u can see the height loss even from wm2 to 3 is somewhat 2" in my estimation.then wm5 were both studd and andre lost height due to illness studd has a max 2" on 6'5" jake roberts and andre has about 4" on studd.so id say andres tallest around the 7'2" mark late 6'11".
Ashman said on 27/Feb/09
iClarke-93 I still look at the video for this and keep trying to guess this guys height....He has to be at least 6.9....Andre only has him by maybe 2 inches....
iClarke-93 I still look at the video for this and keep trying to guess this guys height....He has to be at least 6.9....Andre only has him by maybe 2 inches....
iClarke-93 said on 27/Feb/09
I'm starting to think Andre lost 1" max after his back surgery in March 1987. He still looked very near 7foot at 1987 Survivor Series and even into 1988 he looked 6'11.
I'm starting to think Andre lost 1" max after his back surgery in March 1987. He still looked very near 7foot at 1987 Survivor Series and even into 1988 he looked 6'11.
Ronnie Russell said on 27/Feb/09
OK.....i will be posting a youtube video of the audio of the conversation i talk about below some time in the near future when i have a way to get the mini-tape recorder converted to an *.mp3
I stopped by Andre's ranch in Ellerby, NC, which is now run by some little cajun man named Bernard who has a terrible accent and spits when he talks...
Anyways, he was very nice and hospitible and loves having people visit the ranch and showing them the "Andre Archives" as it were. Some of the artifacts he has there are incredible. He travelled with Andre from the late sixties/early seventies and then again towards the end of his career when he was having a lot of mobility problems. He said at Andre's peak in his youth, when he didn't have any posture problems, he was 7'0.5", measured in japan when he was 22, and that he was around 6'9" at the time of death, because he couldnt stand any taller because of spinal curvature. He also told me that because of his medical condition causing a constant secretion of growth hormone, his bones and organs continued to grow in density and size straight through to the time of his death, so not only did he weigh alot from his fat, but his bones weighed more and his organs did as well.
ANYWAYS, going back to the official "billing" of him being 7'0.25" seems to specific of a number for promoters to lie about, simply because a shady exaggerating promoter would round up to 7'1" or 7'2". i think based on these two facts, the converstaion with someone who knew him personally and also offical measurements, combined with the now several photos of andre standing next to 7'1.16" wilt chamberlain(as measured by the Guiness in 1978, dave melzter was wrong about wilt's height in his article with that photo), I think it is safe to say we can change his official PEAK height to at LEAST 7'0.25", not this 6'11.5" non-sense.
OHHH and BTW, i spoke with former governor Jesse Ventura recently when he was visiting down here in miami with his wife, that Hulk Hogan used to wear 1.5 inch lifts in his wrestling boots often in his career, because he was billed as being "bigger" than incredible hulk star Lou Ferrigno, who was listed at 6'5". Jesse said Hogan was an inch taller than him barefoot, and he was 6'4.5" at his peak. This is how Hogan got his 6'7"-6'8" billing to be believeable.
Also, Jesse said that Big John Studd wore lifts when he wrestled Andre, because he wanted to appear bigger next to him, but he did not have first hand knowledge of exactly how tall BJS was because he never wrestled him or hung out with him.
OK.....i will be posting a youtube video of the audio of the conversation i talk about below some time in the near future when i have a way to get the mini-tape recorder converted to an *.mp3
I stopped by Andre's ranch in Ellerby, NC, which is now run by some little cajun man named Bernard who has a terrible accent and spits when he talks...
Anyways, he was very nice and hospitible and loves having people visit the ranch and showing them the "Andre Archives" as it were. Some of the artifacts he has there are incredible. He travelled with Andre from the late sixties/early seventies and then again towards the end of his career when he was having a lot of mobility problems. He said at Andre's peak in his youth, when he didn't have any posture problems, he was 7'0.5", measured in japan when he was 22, and that he was around 6'9" at the time of death, because he couldnt stand any taller because of spinal curvature. He also told me that because of his medical condition causing a constant secretion of growth hormone, his bones and organs continued to grow in density and size straight through to the time of his death, so not only did he weigh alot from his fat, but his bones weighed more and his organs did as well.
ANYWAYS, going back to the official "billing" of him being 7'0.25" seems to specific of a number for promoters to lie about, simply because a shady exaggerating promoter would round up to 7'1" or 7'2". i think based on these two facts, the converstaion with someone who knew him personally and also offical measurements, combined with the now several photos of andre standing next to 7'1.16" wilt chamberlain(as measured by the Guiness in 1978, dave melzter was wrong about wilt's height in his article with that photo), I think it is safe to say we can change his official PEAK height to at LEAST 7'0.25", not this 6'11.5" non-sense.
OHHH and BTW, i spoke with former governor Jesse Ventura recently when he was visiting down here in miami with his wife, that Hulk Hogan used to wear 1.5 inch lifts in his wrestling boots often in his career, because he was billed as being "bigger" than incredible hulk star Lou Ferrigno, who was listed at 6'5". Jesse said Hogan was an inch taller than him barefoot, and he was 6'4.5" at his peak. This is how Hogan got his 6'7"-6'8" billing to be believeable.
Also, Jesse said that Big John Studd wore lifts when he wrestled Andre, because he wanted to appear bigger next to him, but he did not have first hand knowledge of exactly how tall BJS was because he never wrestled him or hung out with him.
Chaz said on 27/Feb/09
Nash was listed as 7'1''in the WCW when the Giant was in it,and when he was Viny Vagas he was listed as 6'11''but when ever he as been asked.even in the WCW days he has said 6'10''I have no dout he was 6'10'' at the time.
Nash was listed as 7'1''in the WCW when the Giant was in it,and when he was Viny Vagas he was listed as 6'11''but when ever he as been asked.even in the WCW days he has said 6'10''I have no dout he was 6'10'' at the time.
Chris said on 27/Feb/09
On the subject of Kevin Nash, when he first started with WCW as "Master Blaster Steel" he was referred to as 7ft. In a couple of shoot interviews, he has referred to himself as 6'10.
On the subject of Kevin Nash, when he first started with WCW as "Master Blaster Steel" he was referred to as 7ft. In a couple of shoot interviews, he has referred to himself as 6'10.
Chris said on 26/Feb/09
On the topic of the security guard from SS'87, if you watch carefully as Hogan comes charging back into the ring he does go past the security and it appears the guard probably has him by a couple of inches...Most likely the guard was around 6'6 - 6'7"...Keep in mind, Andre's posture while walking was horrible at this point in his career.
On the topic of the security guard from SS'87, if you watch carefully as Hogan comes charging back into the ring he does go past the security and it appears the guard probably has him by a couple of inches...Most likely the guard was around 6'6 - 6'7"...Keep in mind, Andre's posture while walking was horrible at this point in his career.
Big Show said on 26/Feb/09
willy79 says on 26/Feb/09
Nash was listed at 7'1! WCW
That why I said "At least in 1998". He was listed 6'10 in 1998. Don't know what they listed him at before or after, but I know they listed him as 6'10 in 1998.
willy79 says on 26/Feb/09
Nash was listed at 7'1! WCW
That why I said "At least in 1998". He was listed 6'10 in 1998. Don't know what they listed him at before or after, but I know they listed him as 6'10 in 1998.
JT said on 25/Feb/09
sidewalk says on 25/Feb/09
Click Here
Hope this works I've never linked anything in here. That security guard is huge. At 2:48 Andre is leaning forward, 2:52 might be a better shot. Be sure to move it slightly at both times so you get a couple of different shots to look at. Anyone want to play detective and find out who that guy is?....
I distinctly remember that 1987 Survivor Series b/c it was really the first time that I realized that Andre was nowhere near 7'4". My dad pointed out that security guard to me when we were watching the PPV and said what are the odds that this guard is really 7'0". That guy is probably closer to 6'6" as Andre is not standing very straight.
sidewalk says on 25/Feb/09
Click Here
Hope this works I've never linked anything in here. That security guard is huge. At 2:48 Andre is leaning forward, 2:52 might be a better shot. Be sure to move it slightly at both times so you get a couple of different shots to look at. Anyone want to play detective and find out who that guy is?....
I distinctly remember that 1987 Survivor Series b/c it was really the first time that I realized that Andre was nowhere near 7'4". My dad pointed out that security guard to me when we were watching the PPV and said what are the odds that this guard is really 7'0". That guy is probably closer to 6'6" as Andre is not standing very straight.
Vegas said on 25/Feb/09
yeah i don't know why wwf allowed such big security men to accompany their bigger wrestlers, here again is another example at the start the security guy has about 2 inches on hogan Click Here
yeah i don't know why wwf allowed such big security men to accompany their bigger wrestlers, here again is another example at the start the security guy has about 2 inches on hogan Click Here
sidewalk said on 25/Feb/09
Click Here
Hope this works I've never linked anything in here. That security guard is huge. At 2:48 Andre is leaning forward, 2:52 might be a better shot. Be sure to move it slightly at both times so you get a couple of different shots to look at. Anyone want to play detective and find out who that guy is? At times Andre looks 6'10 other times close to 7'. I think he was 6'11-6'11.5 . I'm not a guy who thinks 6'10 is not extremely tall. I do get that sense from some people here as you said Big Show.
Click Here
Hope this works I've never linked anything in here. That security guard is huge. At 2:48 Andre is leaning forward, 2:52 might be a better shot. Be sure to move it slightly at both times so you get a couple of different shots to look at. Anyone want to play detective and find out who that guy is? At times Andre looks 6'10 other times close to 7'. I think he was 6'11-6'11.5 . I'm not a guy who thinks 6'10 is not extremely tall. I do get that sense from some people here as you said Big Show.
iClarke-93 said on 25/Feb/09
He is pretty big Ashman , must be about 6'8 or so.
He is pretty big Ashman , must be about 6'8 or so.
Ashman said on 25/Feb/09
Watch this clip from You Tube, esp. at 2:48 minutes. Look at the size of the Security Guard beside Andre. Hulk Hogan Team vs Andre The Giant Team 1987 Survivor Series.
Watch this clip from You Tube, esp. at 2:48 minutes. Look at the size of the Security Guard beside Andre. Hulk Hogan Team vs Andre The Giant Team 1987 Survivor Series.
sidewalk said on 23/Feb/09
Ok, Bigshow I've been watching wrestling since 1983 so I know plenty about wrestling. If those promoters were so concerned with height and knew it would be such a huge attraction why did they say 210cm? Why wouldn't they exagerate his height. Do you think the french or english athletic commissions would have given fines for not posting real heights and weights?
Ok, Bigshow I've been watching wrestling since 1983 so I know plenty about wrestling. If those promoters were so concerned with height and knew it would be such a huge attraction why did they say 210cm? Why wouldn't they exagerate his height. Do you think the french or english athletic commissions would have given fines for not posting real heights and weights?
Red said on 23/Feb/09
BigKid13 says on 23/Feb/09
My boy is 13 years old and is now 6' 5 1/2" and weighs 325 lbs
Looks barely 6
BigKid13 says on 23/Feb/09
My boy is 13 years old and is now 6' 5 1/2" and weighs 325 lbs
Looks barely 6
BigKid13 said on 23/Feb/09
My boy is 13 years old and is now 6' 5 1/2" and weighs 325 lbs. These are the real and not "wrestling billed" numbers. See his youtube video here!
Click Here
My boy is 13 years old and is now 6' 5 1/2" and weighs 325 lbs. These are the real and not "wrestling billed" numbers. See his youtube video here!
Click Here
Big Show said on 22/Feb/09
JT says on 22/Feb/09
This guy Click Here has a huge collection of Japan-related wrestling items, including many on Andre. Click Here Click Here Click Here
I
JT says on 22/Feb/09
This guy Click Here has a huge collection of Japan-related wrestling items, including many on Andre. Click Here Click Here Click Here
I
Danimal said on 22/Feb/09
mike says on 21/Feb/09
after reviewing the video with hogan and andre next to gene ,hulk to me appears to be around 6'4".Andre more like 6'9" to 6'10" tops.
Wrong
mike says on 21/Feb/09
after reviewing the video with hogan and andre next to gene ,hulk to me appears to be around 6'4".Andre more like 6'9" to 6'10" tops.
Wrong
JT said on 22/Feb/09
This guy Click Here has a huge collection of Japan-related wrestling items, including many on Andre. Click Here Click Here Click Here
I
This guy Click Here has a huge collection of Japan-related wrestling items, including many on Andre. Click Here Click Here Click Here
I
mike said on 21/Feb/09
after reviewing the video with hogan and andre next to gene ,hulk to me appears to be around 6'4".Andre more like 6'9" to 6'10" tops.
after reviewing the video with hogan and andre next to gene ,hulk to me appears to be around 6'4".Andre more like 6'9" to 6'10" tops.
Big Show said on 21/Feb/09
sidewalk says on 20/Feb/09
I think Gretz and Anon have it right with regards to Andre's billings on the posters. His height varied from 210-214cm so which is right? You can't take the lowest the promoter may have only guessed or heard he was that tall. If anyone thinks a promoter actually measured Andre or anyone else you don't know squat about wrestling. They don't care they just ask or come up with height on their own. A former wrestler Masked Maniac himself said "who's to say those posters are right". Where did you find those pics JT? I've looked for candid pics of Studd and they seem hard to find.
If you think a wrestling promoter wouldn't care about Andre's height, you obviously don't know squat about wrestling promoters. For some reason tall people always seem to catch the interest of the general public. Tall wrestlers have come and go and Andre certainly wasn't the first giant to ever step in the ring.
A wrestling promoter sole task is to promote a wrestling card. And you can be sure he does it in a way that it will catch the interest of the general public. If you have a giant wrestler on your card and you bill a match as 'Battle of the Giants' the wrestler's heigt is an important factor in that billing (if not the most important factor). To say that a wrestling promoter didn't care about Andre's height is ignorant. He definately cared enough to put his height on the poster itself to emphasize his height. Wether or not he measured him we'll never know, but I doubt he just randomly wrote down a height. Andre did have a manager at the time and they mostly work closely with the wrestling promoters.
sidewalk says on 20/Feb/09
I think Gretz and Anon have it right with regards to Andre's billings on the posters. His height varied from 210-214cm so which is right? You can't take the lowest the promoter may have only guessed or heard he was that tall. If anyone thinks a promoter actually measured Andre or anyone else you don't know squat about wrestling. They don't care they just ask or come up with height on their own. A former wrestler Masked Maniac himself said "who's to say those posters are right". Where did you find those pics JT? I've looked for candid pics of Studd and they seem hard to find.
If you think a wrestling promoter wouldn't care about Andre's height, you obviously don't know squat about wrestling promoters. For some reason tall people always seem to catch the interest of the general public. Tall wrestlers have come and go and Andre certainly wasn't the first giant to ever step in the ring.
A wrestling promoter sole task is to promote a wrestling card. And you can be sure he does it in a way that it will catch the interest of the general public. If you have a giant wrestler on your card and you bill a match as 'Battle of the Giants' the wrestler's heigt is an important factor in that billing (if not the most important factor). To say that a wrestling promoter didn't care about Andre's height is ignorant. He definately cared enough to put his height on the poster itself to emphasize his height. Wether or not he measured him we'll never know, but I doubt he just randomly wrote down a height. Andre did have a manager at the time and they mostly work closely with the wrestling promoters.
JT said on 21/Feb/09
general93 says on 21/Feb/09
....fralic had huge black boots u could see them a mile away at the battle royle
BS.
Click Here Click Here Studd's soles are every bit as big, if not bigger.
general93 says on 21/Feb/09
....fralic had huge black boots u could see them a mile away at the battle royle
BS.
Click Here Click Here Studd's soles are every bit as big, if not bigger.
JT said on 21/Feb/09
Click Here Studd's taller.
sidewalk says on 20/Feb/09
....Where did you find those pics JT? I've looked for candid pics of Studd and they seem hard to find.
Click Here
Click Here Studd's taller.
sidewalk says on 20/Feb/09
....Where did you find those pics JT? I've looked for candid pics of Studd and they seem hard to find.
Click Here
general93 said on 21/Feb/09
so ola u say stud was 6'4.5" so hogan was 6'3" prime making other guys like duggan slaughter under 6ft prime come on fralic had huge black boots u could see them a mile away at the battle royle. and when studd gets elminated by william perry stud isnt 5" shorter than ed too tall jones.andre wasnt 6'8" stud wasnt 6'4.5".andre was over 7' tall prime and close to 7' late.
so ola u say stud was 6'4.5" so hogan was 6'3" prime making other guys like duggan slaughter under 6ft prime come on fralic had huge black boots u could see them a mile away at the battle royle. and when studd gets elminated by william perry stud isnt 5" shorter than ed too tall jones.andre wasnt 6'8" stud wasnt 6'4.5".andre was over 7' tall prime and close to 7' late.
mike said on 20/Feb/09
andre imo looks around 6,10" ,to me he does ,especially next to 5,8" mean gene.
andre imo looks around 6,10" ,to me he does ,especially next to 5,8" mean gene.
JPH said on 20/Feb/09
Andre appeared about three to five inches taller than Giant Baba when the two legends teamed together against Demolition in April 1990. The match is online, and the best angle for a height comparison is at the end of the match when Baba raises Andre's hand in victory. Japanese promoters listed Baba at 6'10", but several Web sites give 6'6.75" as his actual height. If this height for Baba is correct (a big if, I know), Andre was about 6'9.75" to 6'11.75" at the time of the match with Demolition.
Andre appeared about three to five inches taller than Giant Baba when the two legends teamed together against Demolition in April 1990. The match is online, and the best angle for a height comparison is at the end of the match when Baba raises Andre's hand in victory. Japanese promoters listed Baba at 6'10", but several Web sites give 6'6.75" as his actual height. If this height for Baba is correct (a big if, I know), Andre was about 6'9.75" to 6'11.75" at the time of the match with Demolition.
sidewalk said on 20/Feb/09
I think Gretz and Anon have it right with regards to Andre's billings on the posters. His height varied from 210-214cm so which is right? You can't take the lowest the promoter may have only guessed or heard he was that tall. If anyone thinks a promoter actually measured Andre or anyone else you don't know squat about wrestling. They don't care they just ask or come up with height on their own. A former wrestler Masked Maniac himself said "who's to say those posters are right". Where did you find those pics JT? I've looked for candid pics of Studd and they seem hard to find.
I think Gretz and Anon have it right with regards to Andre's billings on the posters. His height varied from 210-214cm so which is right? You can't take the lowest the promoter may have only guessed or heard he was that tall. If anyone thinks a promoter actually measured Andre or anyone else you don't know squat about wrestling. They don't care they just ask or come up with height on their own. A former wrestler Masked Maniac himself said "who's to say those posters are right". Where did you find those pics JT? I've looked for candid pics of Studd and they seem hard to find.
KingNick said on 19/Feb/09
Hulk and Andre vs. Studd and Bundy Click Here for the first minute or so Hulk and Andre stand right next to each other.
Hulk and Andre vs. Studd and Bundy Click Here for the first minute or so Hulk and Andre stand right next to each other.
KingNick said on 19/Feb/09
Gretz, well said.
Gretz, well said.
Halb said on 19/Feb/09
I think with billing information it shows what a maximum height could not be at a certain age/year. Since wrestlers, especially abnormally large ones, do not get billed at lower than they actually are.
I think with billing information it shows what a maximum height could not be at a certain age/year. Since wrestlers, especially abnormally large ones, do not get billed at lower than they actually are.
Anonymous said on 19/Feb/09
Gretz says on 18/Feb/09
The problem with Andre`s various billings is that they are the same heights we usually argue over 6'10" to 7'0.25".So now we can pick whatever billing we think Andre`s real height was,and use that in our argument and say see this is Andre`s real height because the poster says so.But the fact is,we don`t know if he was actually measured for any of these billings.Since I think Andre peaked at around 7'0",I could also say he was billed in 1964 at 18 years old at 6'10" and continued to grow but they kept using the same old billing for the next 5 years.But really it all comes down to opinion because those posters just don`t prove anything.
Exactly
Gretz says on 18/Feb/09
The problem with Andre`s various billings is that they are the same heights we usually argue over 6'10" to 7'0.25".So now we can pick whatever billing we think Andre`s real height was,and use that in our argument and say see this is Andre`s real height because the poster says so.But the fact is,we don`t know if he was actually measured for any of these billings.Since I think Andre peaked at around 7'0",I could also say he was billed in 1964 at 18 years old at 6'10" and continued to grow but they kept using the same old billing for the next 5 years.But really it all comes down to opinion because those posters just don`t prove anything.
Exactly
Red said on 18/Feb/09
But he was also billed as 212cm and 214cm during that period, I don
But he was also billed as 212cm and 214cm during that period, I don
chris said on 18/Feb/09
The photo of Spivey, Hillbilly Jim and Bill Fralick may be a bit deceptive because of their stances....For what it is worth, I have met Hillbilly twice in the several years..I would say he was a good 6'5 to 6'5 1/2"..Definately not less. My dad (6'5") and I stood next to Danny Spivey back in 1984 when he debuted with Scott Hall with Central States Wrestling. My dad remembers Spivey as being in the "6'6" - 6'7" range...Hard to gauge with wrestling boots.
I will dig up my rare photo of the cast of "Mickie and Maude" when the guys are standing together in tuxedos with dress shoes and you will see that Studd appears shorter next to Andre in dress shoes than he did in his wrestling boots.
The photo of Spivey, Hillbilly Jim and Bill Fralick may be a bit deceptive because of their stances....For what it is worth, I have met Hillbilly twice in the several years..I would say he was a good 6'5 to 6'5 1/2"..Definately not less. My dad (6'5") and I stood next to Danny Spivey back in 1984 when he debuted with Scott Hall with Central States Wrestling. My dad remembers Spivey as being in the "6'6" - 6'7" range...Hard to gauge with wrestling boots.
I will dig up my rare photo of the cast of "Mickie and Maude" when the guys are standing together in tuxedos with dress shoes and you will see that Studd appears shorter next to Andre in dress shoes than he did in his wrestling boots.
Danimal said on 18/Feb/09
Chaz says on 18/Feb/09
Big Show,the reason he was listed in metric,was cos he was French,no one in the UK used metric,untill after 1971,and even now most over 40s have not got a clue what 180cm or 210cm is,let alone 140kg unless you said 22st, I just seen the UKs strongest man on Brovo tv and at the begining thay say there height and weight,and at the side it was in metric,not one was right,one guy said he is 5'9'' and 16st that come out as 180cm 100kg Glenn Ross is 30st and 6'1''that come out at 200kg and 190cm that is 31st6lbs and nere 6'3''and one guy who said he was 6'6''and 24st7lbs was given only 195cm and 150kgs about 6'4.5''and 23st,metric is mostly rownd up or down in the UK,like I said the 210cmis more likely to be a metric rownd down of 7 foot,ive seen it with 1992 worlds strongest man 7'.25''Ted Van Der Parare he is mostly listed as 210cm.
I loved the 1992 World's Strongest Man Competition held in Iceland. That was the LAST we saw of Jon Pall Sigmarsson. He didn't compete that year but he was giving advice to former strong man Jamie Reeves. Actually, ALL strong men competitions from the late 70's to the late 90's were great.
Chaz says on 18/Feb/09
Big Show,the reason he was listed in metric,was cos he was French,no one in the UK used metric,untill after 1971,and even now most over 40s have not got a clue what 180cm or 210cm is,let alone 140kg unless you said 22st, I just seen the UKs strongest man on Brovo tv and at the begining thay say there height and weight,and at the side it was in metric,not one was right,one guy said he is 5'9'' and 16st that come out as 180cm 100kg Glenn Ross is 30st and 6'1''that come out at 200kg and 190cm that is 31st6lbs and nere 6'3''and one guy who said he was 6'6''and 24st7lbs was given only 195cm and 150kgs about 6'4.5''and 23st,metric is mostly rownd up or down in the UK,like I said the 210cmis more likely to be a metric rownd down of 7 foot,ive seen it with 1992 worlds strongest man 7'.25''Ted Van Der Parare he is mostly listed as 210cm.
I loved the 1992 World's Strongest Man Competition held in Iceland. That was the LAST we saw of Jon Pall Sigmarsson. He didn't compete that year but he was giving advice to former strong man Jamie Reeves. Actually, ALL strong men competitions from the late 70's to the late 90's were great.
Gretz said on 18/Feb/09
The problem with Andre`s various billings is that they are the same heights we usually argue over 6'10" to 7'0.25".So now we can pick whatever billing we think Andre`s real height was,and use that in our argument and say see this is Andre`s real height because the poster says so.But the fact is,we don`t know if he was actually measured for any of these billings.Since I think Andre peaked at around 7'0",I could also say he was billed in 1964 at 18 years old at 6'10" and continued to grow but they kept using the same old billing for the next 5 years.But really it all comes down to opinion because those posters just don`t prove anything.
The problem with Andre`s various billings is that they are the same heights we usually argue over 6'10" to 7'0.25".So now we can pick whatever billing we think Andre`s real height was,and use that in our argument and say see this is Andre`s real height because the poster says so.But the fact is,we don`t know if he was actually measured for any of these billings.Since I think Andre peaked at around 7'0",I could also say he was billed in 1964 at 18 years old at 6'10" and continued to grow but they kept using the same old billing for the next 5 years.But really it all comes down to opinion because those posters just don`t prove anything.
Big Show said on 18/Feb/09
Chaz says on 18/Feb/09
you are all missing the point'if you think that in the late 1960s,a Uk promoter,would know the differance from 210cm and 7'you no nothing about the UK,you could not easaly buy a metric tape then,and it was only learnt in Schools after 1971,you may as well been talking in differant tong,even now in the UK 90% of people would not know what 180cm is in feet and Inch,I'm not saying Andre was 7 feet,cos I have never seen him live,i'm still not sure of he's true height,I will only be sure when iv'e seen more pics or fiim of him with Giant Haystacks who I know for sure had a peak Evening height of 6'8''give or take 1/2inch.
Like Vegas said, Andre was billed in inches not in centimetres in the UK. The conversion in the UK went from the metric system to the imperial system.
I know the conversion from inches to centimetres proves to be difficult. Most of times they convert an inch to 2.5 cm (instead of 2.54 cm). This can result into several cm's height loss. A 6'6 guy would therefore be 195cm.
It's of course pure guesswork to figure out how the English came to bill him 6'10. But my guess is he was probably around that mark at the time (somewhere between 6'10-6'11).
Chaz says on 18/Feb/09
you are all missing the point'if you think that in the late 1960s,a Uk promoter,would know the differance from 210cm and 7'you no nothing about the UK,you could not easaly buy a metric tape then,and it was only learnt in Schools after 1971,you may as well been talking in differant tong,even now in the UK 90% of people would not know what 180cm is in feet and Inch,I'm not saying Andre was 7 feet,cos I have never seen him live,i'm still not sure of he's true height,I will only be sure when iv'e seen more pics or fiim of him with Giant Haystacks who I know for sure had a peak Evening height of 6'8''give or take 1/2inch.
Like Vegas said, Andre was billed in inches not in centimetres in the UK. The conversion in the UK went from the metric system to the imperial system.
I know the conversion from inches to centimetres proves to be difficult. Most of times they convert an inch to 2.5 cm (instead of 2.54 cm). This can result into several cm's height loss. A 6'6 guy would therefore be 195cm.
It's of course pure guesswork to figure out how the English came to bill him 6'10. But my guess is he was probably around that mark at the time (somewhere between 6'10-6'11).
Chaz said on 18/Feb/09
Vagas that is my point,6'10'' is not 210cm so what is right,is the 210cm a rownd up or down,by the Uk promoters. or was he 212cm ,or 214cm,or is that the normal growth of a Acromgealic over that time 4cm is not a lot is it ?
Vagas that is my point,6'10'' is not 210cm so what is right,is the 210cm a rownd up or down,by the Uk promoters. or was he 212cm ,or 214cm,or is that the normal growth of a Acromgealic over that time 4cm is not a lot is it ?
Vegas said on 18/Feb/09
Chaz; andre wasn't billed metric in the uk in 1969, he was billed at 6'10
Chaz; andre wasn't billed metric in the uk in 1969, he was billed at 6'10
Chaz said on 18/Feb/09
you are all missing the point'if you think that in the late 1960s,a Uk promoter,would know the differance from 210cm and 7'you no nothing about the UK,you could not easaly buy a metric tape then,and it was only learnt in Schools after 1971,you may as well been talking in differant tong,even now in the UK 90% of people would not know what 180cm is in feet and Inch,I'm not saying Andre was 7 feet,cos I have never seen him live,i'm still not sure of he's true height,I will only be sure when iv'e seen more pics or fiim of him with Giant Haystacks who I know for sure had a peak Evening height of 6'8''give or take 1/2inch.
you are all missing the point'if you think that in the late 1960s,a Uk promoter,would know the differance from 210cm and 7'you no nothing about the UK,you could not easaly buy a metric tape then,and it was only learnt in Schools after 1971,you may as well been talking in differant tong,even now in the UK 90% of people would not know what 180cm is in feet and Inch,I'm not saying Andre was 7 feet,cos I have never seen him live,i'm still not sure of he's true height,I will only be sure when iv'e seen more pics or fiim of him with Giant Haystacks who I know for sure had a peak Evening height of 6'8''give or take 1/2inch.
Halb said on 18/Feb/09
The WSM series is not good at conversions. I would doubt that most round down in metric since metric is a much more accurate system than Imperial.
Studd was marginally over Fralic, I would say Ola. Fralic's 6'5 may have bene a round up. What is Studd, half an inch to an inch over him, you might say you could round Studd up to 6'6.
The WSM series is not good at conversions. I would doubt that most round down in metric since metric is a much more accurate system than Imperial.
Studd was marginally over Fralic, I would say Ola. Fralic's 6'5 may have bene a round up. What is Studd, half an inch to an inch over him, you might say you could round Studd up to 6'6.
Chaz said on 18/Feb/09
Big Show,the reason he was listed in metric,was cos he was French,no one in the UK used metric,untill after 1971,and even now most over 40s have not got a clue what 180cm or 210cm is,let alone 140kg unless you said 22st, I just seen the UKs strongest man on Brovo tv and at the begining thay say there height and weight,and at the side it was in metric,not one was right,one guy said he is 5'9'' and 16st that come out as 180cm 100kg Glenn Ross is 30st and 6'1''that come out at 200kg and 190cm that is 31st6lbs and nere 6'3''and one guy who said he was 6'6''and 24st7lbs was given only 195cm and 150kgs about 6'4.5''and 23st,metric is mostly rownd up or down in the UK,like I said the 210cmis more likely to be a metric rownd down of 7 foot,ive seen it with 1992 worlds strongest man 7'.25''Ted Van Der Parare he is mostly listed as 210cm.
Big Show,the reason he was listed in metric,was cos he was French,no one in the UK used metric,untill after 1971,and even now most over 40s have not got a clue what 180cm or 210cm is,let alone 140kg unless you said 22st, I just seen the UKs strongest man on Brovo tv and at the begining thay say there height and weight,and at the side it was in metric,not one was right,one guy said he is 5'9'' and 16st that come out as 180cm 100kg Glenn Ross is 30st and 6'1''that come out at 200kg and 190cm that is 31st6lbs and nere 6'3''and one guy who said he was 6'6''and 24st7lbs was given only 195cm and 150kgs about 6'4.5''and 23st,metric is mostly rownd up or down in the UK,like I said the 210cmis more likely to be a metric rownd down of 7 foot,ive seen it with 1992 worlds strongest man 7'.25''Ted Van Der Parare he is mostly listed as 210cm.
Danimal said on 17/Feb/09
7'0 1/4" peak height for Andre. That is his TALLEST BILLING from his early days. Could have lost as much as 2.5" in 25 years of having his disease and the effects his noticeably had on his aging and deteriorating body. Just watch his 1972 match from Japan. He was young, strong, healthy, lean (and quite muscular), agile, flexible, quick and TALL (great posture with NO hump on his neck and NO buckled and wobbly legs/knees). THAT Andre would have stood as tall as Big Show EASILY.
7'0 1/4" peak height for Andre. That is his TALLEST BILLING from his early days. Could have lost as much as 2.5" in 25 years of having his disease and the effects his noticeably had on his aging and deteriorating body. Just watch his 1972 match from Japan. He was young, strong, healthy, lean (and quite muscular), agile, flexible, quick and TALL (great posture with NO hump on his neck and NO buckled and wobbly legs/knees). THAT Andre would have stood as tall as Big Show EASILY.
aram x said on 17/Feb/09
Sorry for pointing out the obvious, but Andre seems to have an enormous head. I wonder what his hat size was.
Sorry for pointing out the obvious, but Andre seems to have an enormous head. I wonder what his hat size was.
willy79 said on 17/Feb/09
Studd had at the very least if not more an inch on 6'6 Hogan.
Studd had at the very least if not more an inch on 6'6 Hogan.
Ghost said on 17/Feb/09
Clay says on 16/Feb/09
I was watching a match between Andre and two Japansese wrestlers in 1977 and he was just a GARGANTUAN man. In all honesty a drop from a peak of 7'2 to 6'10 right before death wouldn't shock me, he was a tower in his youth.
Well, it's not too hard to look huge if you're close to 7 feet tall and your opponents are like 5'4.
Seriously Andre going from 7'2 to 6'10 is just ridiculous. Tons of pics prove he didn't loose even 2 inches.
Some people here seem to believe that Andre grew taller after many years of being billed 210 cm and went right back to 6'10-6'11 in the 80s before anybody could take a picture.
Anything over 7 feet for Andre just doesn't go with what the evidence suggests. It sound like some people just want him to be over 7 feet tall and "prove" it by either posting pics of him with people over a foot shorter than him or saying that he lost like 3 inches of height, which just isn't the case. Some people also refer to pictures with horrible camera angles and disregard tons of other pictures which show Andre at a believable height of 6'11.
Clay says on 16/Feb/09
I was watching a match between Andre and two Japansese wrestlers in 1977 and he was just a GARGANTUAN man. In all honesty a drop from a peak of 7'2 to 6'10 right before death wouldn't shock me, he was a tower in his youth.
Well, it's not too hard to look huge if you're close to 7 feet tall and your opponents are like 5'4.
Seriously Andre going from 7'2 to 6'10 is just ridiculous. Tons of pics prove he didn't loose even 2 inches.
Some people here seem to believe that Andre grew taller after many years of being billed 210 cm and went right back to 6'10-6'11 in the 80s before anybody could take a picture.
Anything over 7 feet for Andre just doesn't go with what the evidence suggests. It sound like some people just want him to be over 7 feet tall and "prove" it by either posting pics of him with people over a foot shorter than him or saying that he lost like 3 inches of height, which just isn't the case. Some people also refer to pictures with horrible camera angles and disregard tons of other pictures which show Andre at a believable height of 6'11.
Big Show said on 17/Feb/09
Chaz says on 15/Feb/09
I think Red is right,in Europe 6 foot or 7 foot mean nothing,180cm and 210cm or 240cm is there 8 foot,if Andre is listed as 207cm or 212cm then that is more likely to be right,as 210cm is more likely to be a rownd up or down.
If that's the case I'd be interested to hear your explanation for the 6'10 listing in the UK. If Andre was 212 cm (6'11.5) it means he was listed 1.5" below his actual height. No wrestling promoter is dumb enough to bill one of the tallest wrestlers in the world that much below his actual height. Especially since Andre's size was basically his only asset at the time (he was still very green in the ring).
210 cm (6'10 2/3)adds up to a lot of things. He could be listed at 6'10 if he was measured later in the day and found out to be 6'10 1/4 or something. It also explains his 6'11 references in various wrestling magazines at the time. 212cm would then be his height in shoes. As for his 214cm listing. He's also billed at 171kg (377 lbs) on that same billing, which is obviously an exaggeration as Andre was around 310 lbs at the time.
Chaz says on 15/Feb/09
I think Red is right,in Europe 6 foot or 7 foot mean nothing,180cm and 210cm or 240cm is there 8 foot,if Andre is listed as 207cm or 212cm then that is more likely to be right,as 210cm is more likely to be a rownd up or down.
If that's the case I'd be interested to hear your explanation for the 6'10 listing in the UK. If Andre was 212 cm (6'11.5) it means he was listed 1.5" below his actual height. No wrestling promoter is dumb enough to bill one of the tallest wrestlers in the world that much below his actual height. Especially since Andre's size was basically his only asset at the time (he was still very green in the ring).
210 cm (6'10 2/3)adds up to a lot of things. He could be listed at 6'10 if he was measured later in the day and found out to be 6'10 1/4 or something. It also explains his 6'11 references in various wrestling magazines at the time. 212cm would then be his height in shoes. As for his 214cm listing. He's also billed at 171kg (377 lbs) on that same billing, which is obviously an exaggeration as Andre was around 310 lbs at the time.
iClarke-93 said on 17/Feb/09
Mamun has him Andre spot on , 7'0 or 7'0.5 peak , anything under is ridiculous if you watch his interviews with 6'1.5 Vince McMahon from his early days in the WWE. Studd I'm starting to think may not have been a legit 6'7 , maybe 6'6.5 is on the money for him , he was definetely a little bit taller than Hogan at 6'6".
Mamun has him Andre spot on , 7'0 or 7'0.5 peak , anything under is ridiculous if you watch his interviews with 6'1.5 Vince McMahon from his early days in the WWE. Studd I'm starting to think may not have been a legit 6'7 , maybe 6'6.5 is on the money for him , he was definetely a little bit taller than Hogan at 6'6".
Big Show said on 17/Feb/09
Paul says on 16/Feb/09
Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than
Hogan and prone to wearing well heeled boots also.
Are you talking about in- or outside of the ring? I can't remember ever seeing Studd in big-heeled boots in a wrestling ring.
Paul says on 16/Feb/09
Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than
Hogan and prone to wearing well heeled boots also.
Are you talking about in- or outside of the ring? I can't remember ever seeing Studd in big-heeled boots in a wrestling ring.
Mamun said on 16/Feb/09
I would go for 7' 0.5" peak height ( based on the picture with Wilt and other
references as well ) and 6' 10" before his death or in the late 80's !
Regards
Mamun
I would go for 7' 0.5" peak height ( based on the picture with Wilt and other
references as well ) and 6' 10" before his death or in the late 80's !
Regards
Mamun
Clay said on 16/Feb/09
I was watching a match between Andre and two Japansese wrestlers in 1977 and he was just a GARGANTUAN man. In all honesty a drop from a peak of 7'2 to 6'10 right before death wouldn't shock me, he was a tower in his youth.
I was watching a match between Andre and two Japansese wrestlers in 1977 and he was just a GARGANTUAN man. In all honesty a drop from a peak of 7'2 to 6'10 right before death wouldn't shock me, he was a tower in his youth.
Danimal said on 16/Feb/09
Paul says on 16/Feb/09
Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than
Hogan and prone to wearing well heeled boots also.
Agreed.
Paul says on 16/Feb/09
Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than
Hogan and prone to wearing well heeled boots also.
Agreed.
Halb said on 16/Feb/09
"Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than"
He was slightly taller than Fralic
"Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than"
He was slightly taller than Fralic
Paul said on 16/Feb/09
Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than
Hogan and prone to wearing well heeled boots also.
Studd (John Minton)... 6'6.5 - 6'7, yes slightly taller than
Hogan and prone to wearing well heeled boots also.
Halb said on 16/Feb/09
Studd wasn't 2 inches above Fralic. 6'7 is right out.
Studd wasn't 2 inches above Fralic. 6'7 is right out.
iClarke-93 said on 16/Feb/09
Mamun , what do think Andre's peak height was?
Mamun , what do think Andre's peak height was?
Mamun said on 15/Feb/09
Thank you Big Show for your kind posting ! My friend the first picture you
posted has Andre towering over Studd by almost 10 inches ! Also in 1989
Andre was 42 years old and only 4 years away from his death . He was no
where near his prime . Most of the good posters here who hates Andre keeps
on using pictures of Andre from that time frame only ! They never take into
consideration that Andre had Back Surgery , was in extreme pain , was dying
in a very painful way and not in his youth. But these are also the same good
posters who always seem to use the early and young pictures of Big Show when
he was in his WCW days and wearing lifts every time they want to compare
him with Andre ! My mother always used to tell me life wasn't fair !
And Studd was no where above the 6' 5" mark ! If he was anything above ,then
exactly what happened in that staredown with 6' 4.5" Bill Flairic ? Did he
forget his lifts ?
Thank you Big Show for your kind posting ! My friend the first picture you
posted has Andre towering over Studd by almost 10 inches ! Also in 1989
Andre was 42 years old and only 4 years away from his death . He was no
where near his prime . Most of the good posters here who hates Andre keeps
on using pictures of Andre from that time frame only ! They never take into
consideration that Andre had Back Surgery , was in extreme pain , was dying
in a very painful way and not in his youth. But these are also the same good
posters who always seem to use the early and young pictures of Big Show when
he was in his WCW days and wearing lifts every time they want to compare
him with Andre ! My mother always used to tell me life wasn't fair !
And Studd was no where above the 6' 5" mark ! If he was anything above ,then
exactly what happened in that staredown with 6' 4.5" Bill Flairic ? Did he
forget his lifts ?
willy79 said on 15/Feb/09
Well, JT your proof has finally nailed the coffin shut on Studd as far as I'm concerned. Anything under 6'7 is crazy!
Well, JT your proof has finally nailed the coffin shut on Studd as far as I'm concerned. Anything under 6'7 is crazy!
KingNick said on 15/Feb/09
Studd's a hard one to call. I'm going to put him at 6'5.5" - 6'6" He does appear to be slightly taller than Fralic but I don't see 2". Great segment by the way. I miss the days when wrestling was interview, a match, then an interview rather than all the drama that goes on now.
Studd's a hard one to call. I'm going to put him at 6'5.5" - 6'6" He does appear to be slightly taller than Fralic but I don't see 2". Great segment by the way. I miss the days when wrestling was interview, a match, then an interview rather than all the drama that goes on now.
Rick said on 15/Feb/09
SayHeyKid says on 14/Feb/09
Rick: You have to be the funniest guy posting on the Andre thread. Putting aside the veracity of your claim to have stood next to Andre the in 80's, twice I believe you have claimed, along with your self-proclaimed ability to quickly and precisely pin his measurement down, not to mention that your supposed sightings occurred well after Andre's prime, you have now attempted to subtly change your estimate from 6'10" to 6'9"-6'10." This is what is known as an agenda. Oh, and please spare everyone with yet another recitation of how you were able to judge Andre's height, well after his prime, because of the heights of your "brother" and "friend." Do you even remember how tall your "friend" was? Quickly, no reading your prior posts to "refresh" your memory.
Perhaps you should review my posts. As I've stated several times previously, the second time I met Andre he appeared slightly shorter, due most likely to the noticable hunch he exhibited. Myself and several other pegged him at around 6'10" in the early 80's so -slightly shorter- puts his height less than that,closer to 6'9", a measurement I believe I've already attributed to his height around that time. And, just for the record, my friend was, and still is, 6'9". He lived directly across the street from me for many years and I've stood next to him countless times. In my book, that gives me a pretty good reference when I come across someone close to his height, such as Andre.
SayHeyKid says on 14/Feb/09
Rick: You have to be the funniest guy posting on the Andre thread. Putting aside the veracity of your claim to have stood next to Andre the in 80's, twice I believe you have claimed, along with your self-proclaimed ability to quickly and precisely pin his measurement down, not to mention that your supposed sightings occurred well after Andre's prime, you have now attempted to subtly change your estimate from 6'10" to 6'9"-6'10." This is what is known as an agenda. Oh, and please spare everyone with yet another recitation of how you were able to judge Andre's height, well after his prime, because of the heights of your "brother" and "friend." Do you even remember how tall your "friend" was? Quickly, no reading your prior posts to "refresh" your memory.
Perhaps you should review my posts. As I've stated several times previously, the second time I met Andre he appeared slightly shorter, due most likely to the noticable hunch he exhibited. Myself and several other pegged him at around 6'10" in the early 80's so -slightly shorter- puts his height less than that,closer to 6'9", a measurement I believe I've already attributed to his height around that time. And, just for the record, my friend was, and still is, 6'9". He lived directly across the street from me for many years and I've stood next to him countless times. In my book, that gives me a pretty good reference when I come across someone close to his height, such as Andre.
Big Show said on 15/Feb/09
That Andre is listed as 212 cm or 214 cm doesn't necessarily mean anything. He's also listed at 7'4 in the U.S. remember and apart from a few people on here most know that Andre was not that tall. That he's listed at 210cm doesn't mean he is 210cm either, however if there's one thing that I've learned from wrestling over the past decade is that the giants of wrestling don't get listed below their actual height. 99% of times their heights are exaggerated. Sometimes by extreme measures (Stan Frazier at 7'7, Kurt Zehe at 8'2) or sometimes only by a few inches (Jorge Gonzales at 7'7, Big Show at 7'). I can't think of a single example of a wrestler who's over 6'8 and got listed below his actual height. Maybe by 0.5" but certainly not several inches as many here claim that Andre must've been.
It just goes against anything that the wrestling world has thought me over the years.
I've said this before but I'll say it again. It's in the interest of a promoter to bill a match in a way that it catches the interest of the general public. Back then wrestling posters were basically the only thing that attracted people to their shows. If a promoter bills a match as "The Battle of the Giants" and then downgrades his 'giants' well below their actual heights I ask you guys: does that make any sense?
That Andre is listed as 212 cm or 214 cm doesn't necessarily mean anything. He's also listed at 7'4 in the U.S. remember and apart from a few people on here most know that Andre was not that tall. That he's listed at 210cm doesn't mean he is 210cm either, however if there's one thing that I've learned from wrestling over the past decade is that the giants of wrestling don't get listed below their actual height. 99% of times their heights are exaggerated. Sometimes by extreme measures (Stan Frazier at 7'7, Kurt Zehe at 8'2) or sometimes only by a few inches (Jorge Gonzales at 7'7, Big Show at 7'). I can't think of a single example of a wrestler who's over 6'8 and got listed below his actual height. Maybe by 0.5" but certainly not several inches as many here claim that Andre must've been.
It just goes against anything that the wrestling world has thought me over the years.
I've said this before but I'll say it again. It's in the interest of a promoter to bill a match in a way that it catches the interest of the general public. Back then wrestling posters were basically the only thing that attracted people to their shows. If a promoter bills a match as "The Battle of the Giants" and then downgrades his 'giants' well below their actual heights I ask you guys: does that make any sense?
JT said on 15/Feb/09
Bill Eadie (billed at 6
Bill Eadie (billed at 6
Anonymous said on 15/Feb/09
Danimal says on 15/Feb/09
Also, you can see how Andre TOWERS 5'8" Mean Gene here when he played the masked Giant from Japan.
on another page you claim davey boy smith was max 5'9 but he clearly has 3 inches on 5'8 gene here, either bulldog was 5'11 or gene was 5'6 because its impossible gene was 5'8 and bulldog 5'9 based on this Click Here
Danimal says on 15/Feb/09
Also, you can see how Andre TOWERS 5'8" Mean Gene here when he played the masked Giant from Japan.
on another page you claim davey boy smith was max 5'9 but he clearly has 3 inches on 5'8 gene here, either bulldog was 5'11 or gene was 5'6 because its impossible gene was 5'8 and bulldog 5'9 based on this Click Here
Chaz said on 15/Feb/09
I think Red is right,in Europe 6 foot or 7 foot mean nothing,180cm and 210cm or 240cm is there 8 foot,if Andre is listed as 207cm or 212cm then that is more likely to be right,as 210cm is more likely to be a rownd up or down.
I think Red is right,in Europe 6 foot or 7 foot mean nothing,180cm and 210cm or 240cm is there 8 foot,if Andre is listed as 207cm or 212cm then that is more likely to be right,as 210cm is more likely to be a rownd up or down.
Gretz said on 15/Feb/09
Lets not forget that Andre looked a strong 6'10" or so as late as 1991 next to Mane,a guy taller than Studd.As for all those billings (6'10.67",6'11.46",7'0.25")they add up to zero,thats what they tell us about Andre`s real height.
Lets not forget that Andre looked a strong 6'10" or so as late as 1991 next to Mane,a guy taller than Studd.As for all those billings (6'10.67",6'11.46",7'0.25")they add up to zero,thats what they tell us about Andre`s real height.
Danimal said on 15/Feb/09
Studd was 6'7". He has an easy 5-6" on Vince McMahon in 1986.
Also, you can see how Andre TOWERS 5'8" Mean Gene here when he played the masked Giant from Japan. The guy on the other side of Mean Gene was the Masked Superstar who later played AX from Demolition, who was 6'2" and 300 pounds himself:
Click Here
Studd was 6'7". He has an easy 5-6" on Vince McMahon in 1986.
Also, you can see how Andre TOWERS 5'8" Mean Gene here when he played the masked Giant from Japan. The guy on the other side of Mean Gene was the Masked Superstar who later played AX from Demolition, who was 6'2" and 300 pounds himself:
Click Here
iClarke-93 said on 15/Feb/09
Big Show , Studd may not have worn lifts , but he still had a very slight footwear advantage in that match over Andre.
Big Show , Studd may not have worn lifts , but he still had a very slight footwear advantage in that match over Andre.
Red said on 15/Feb/09
Big Show says on 14/Feb/09
...if Andre was still growing how come he was listed as 210cm in 1965, 1968 and 1969?
Andre was also billed at 212cm and 214cm during that period, why ignore that? 210cm is just a magic sticking point in europe as 7ft in US and UK
Big Show says on 14/Feb/09
...if Andre was still growing how come he was listed as 210cm in 1965, 1968 and 1969?
Andre was also billed at 212cm and 214cm during that period, why ignore that? 210cm is just a magic sticking point in europe as 7ft in US and UK
Red said on 15/Feb/09
Big Show, the endocrinologist said in an interview that he never measured Stadnik, the 8
Big Show, the endocrinologist said in an interview that he never measured Stadnik, the 8
Big Show said on 15/Feb/09
R Miller says on 14/Feb/09
Leonid Stadnik.......When the guiness book of world records says that he is 8'5" that's good enough for me. There is no doubt.....
So much for your credibility. You claim you can pinch Andre's height down to a quarter of an inch, yet you can't even see that Stadnik is nowhere near his 8'5 listing. For your information, his listing in Guinness was a fluke and one of the biggest blunders that Guinness ever made. They never even measured him, they listed them because of a claim of a famous endocrinologist that he measured him at 8'5.5. Guinness could've saved their faces if they even verified that claim as it turned out this famous endocrinologist didn't even measure him either.
R Miller says on 14/Feb/09
Leonid Stadnik.......When the guiness book of world records says that he is 8'5" that's good enough for me. There is no doubt.....
So much for your credibility. You claim you can pinch Andre's height down to a quarter of an inch, yet you can't even see that Stadnik is nowhere near his 8'5 listing. For your information, his listing in Guinness was a fluke and one of the biggest blunders that Guinness ever made. They never even measured him, they listed them because of a claim of a famous endocrinologist that he measured him at 8'5.5. Guinness could've saved their faces if they even verified that claim as it turned out this famous endocrinologist didn't even measure him either.
mike said on 15/Feb/09
imo andre looks 3-4 inches taller than studd who i believe was around 6'6" ,so with that i give andre 6'10",maybe 6'11" tops.
imo andre looks 3-4 inches taller than studd who i believe was around 6'6" ,so with that i give andre 6'10",maybe 6'11" tops.
R Miller said on 14/Feb/09
Leonid Stadnik.......When the guiness book of world records says that he is 8'5" that's good enough for me. There is no doubt.....
Leonid Stadnik.......When the guiness book of world records says that he is 8'5" that's good enough for me. There is no doubt.....
Anonymous said on 14/Feb/09
Studd was 6'7.
Studd was 6'7.
Big Show said on 14/Feb/09
Mamun says on 13/Feb/09
My friend Big Show , your also ignoring the very sceintific fact that Andre
was still growing big time even after those measurements in 1965 and 1969 !
He was an Accromigalic giant remember and they grow well even after the ages
of 25 or even 30 ! How come you are not taking this into account . And Studd
is a lift wearer and that's a fact . Andre never even wore soles in the ring ,
he wrerstled almost barefoot according to the thickness of the soles of his
shoes !
My friend Mamun, if Andre was still growing how come he was listed as 210cm in 1965, 1968 and 1969? That does not really sound as someone who's still growing. I
Mamun says on 13/Feb/09
My friend Big Show , your also ignoring the very sceintific fact that Andre
was still growing big time even after those measurements in 1965 and 1969 !
He was an Accromigalic giant remember and they grow well even after the ages
of 25 or even 30 ! How come you are not taking this into account . And Studd
is a lift wearer and that's a fact . Andre never even wore soles in the ring ,
he wrerstled almost barefoot according to the thickness of the soles of his
shoes !
My friend Mamun, if Andre was still growing how come he was listed as 210cm in 1965, 1968 and 1969? That does not really sound as someone who's still growing. I
SayHeyKid said on 14/Feb/09
Rick: You have to be the funniest guy posting on the Andre thread. Putting aside the veracity of your claim to have stood next to Andre the in 80's, twice I believe you have claimed, along with your self-proclaimed ability to quickly and precisely pin his measurement down, not to mention that your supposed sightings occurred well after Andre's prime, you have now attempted to subtly change your estimate from 6'10" to 6'9"-6'10." This is what is known as an agenda. Oh, and please spare everyone with yet another recitation of how you were able to judge Andre's height, well after his prime, because of the heights of your "brother" and "friend." Do you even remember how tall your "friend" was? Quickly, no reading your prior posts to "refresh" your memory.
Rick: You have to be the funniest guy posting on the Andre thread. Putting aside the veracity of your claim to have stood next to Andre the in 80's, twice I believe you have claimed, along with your self-proclaimed ability to quickly and precisely pin his measurement down, not to mention that your supposed sightings occurred well after Andre's prime, you have now attempted to subtly change your estimate from 6'10" to 6'9"-6'10." This is what is known as an agenda. Oh, and please spare everyone with yet another recitation of how you were able to judge Andre's height, well after his prime, because of the heights of your "brother" and "friend." Do you even remember how tall your "friend" was? Quickly, no reading your prior posts to "refresh" your memory.
iClarke-93 said on 14/Feb/09
Mamun , what height do you estimate Big John Studd at?
Mamun , what height do you estimate Big John Studd at?
Halb said on 14/Feb/09
After looking at those pics, it does look less than 4.
After looking at those pics, it does look less than 4.
JT said on 13/Feb/09
Big Show says on 13/Feb/09
Big Show says on 13/Feb/09
Mamun said on 13/Feb/09
My friend Big Show , your also ignoring the very sceintific fact that Andre
was still growing big time even after those measurements in 1965 and 1969 !
He was an Accromigalic giant remember and they grow well even after the ages
of 25 or even 30 ! How come you are not taking this into account . And Studd
is a lift wearer and that's a fact . Andre never even wore soles in the ring ,
he wrerstled almost barefoot according to the thickness of the soles of his
shoes !
Regards
Mamun
My friend Big Show , your also ignoring the very sceintific fact that Andre
was still growing big time even after those measurements in 1965 and 1969 !
He was an Accromigalic giant remember and they grow well even after the ages
of 25 or even 30 ! How come you are not taking this into account . And Studd
is a lift wearer and that's a fact . Andre never even wore soles in the ring ,
he wrerstled almost barefoot according to the thickness of the soles of his
shoes !
Regards
Mamun
Rick said on 13/Feb/09
iClarke-93 says on 13/Feb/09
Andre had 4 inches on Studd in that match which makes a strong case for Andre being over 6'11 after back surgery.
That's if you want to put Studd at the 6'8" mark, which he certainly was not. Studd was only about 6'6" and judging by that photo Andre has Studd by -maybe- 4 inches...I'd say closer to 3, which puts Andre right at the exact height he looked to me during the late 80's, between 6'9-10".
iClarke-93 says on 13/Feb/09
Andre had 4 inches on Studd in that match which makes a strong case for Andre being over 6'11 after back surgery.
That's if you want to put Studd at the 6'8" mark, which he certainly was not. Studd was only about 6'6" and judging by that photo Andre has Studd by -maybe- 4 inches...I'd say closer to 3, which puts Andre right at the exact height he looked to me during the late 80's, between 6'9-10".
Boss said on 13/Feb/09
Andre looks 6'11 with Studd in 1989.
Andre looks 6'11 with Studd in 1989.
Halb said on 13/Feb/09
I don't think Studd was 6'7.
I don't think Studd was 6'7.
iClarke-93 said on 13/Feb/09
Andre had 4 inches on Studd in that match which makes a strong case for Andre being over 6'11 after back surgery.
Andre had 4 inches on Studd in that match which makes a strong case for Andre being over 6'11 after back surgery.
Halb said on 13/Feb/09
I would agree with JT, the diff betwene Studd and ANdre looks more like 4 inches in those pics, not 5. Andre does try to get more from his eyeline by tilting his head back, but take away the poofy hair from both and it looks 4.
I would agree with JT, the diff betwene Studd and ANdre looks more like 4 inches in those pics, not 5. Andre does try to get more from his eyeline by tilting his head back, but take away the poofy hair from both and it looks 4.
Big Show said on 13/Feb/09
dicksock says on 12/Feb/09
Any unbiased person can clearly see about 5" between Studd and Andre in that stardown. He towered over him.
Click Here
When both assume a similar posture the difference isn't even 4 inches. If Andre is 5 inches taller and you claim Studd is a minimum of 6'7 and has a footwear advantage I take it you still think is Andre is 7'+ by 1989???
You probably only look at pictures like this to think the difference is 5"
Click Here
The fact that Andre is lifting his head backwards probably went unnoticed by you. It does surprise me that you always seem to be seeing the exact amount of inches that's needed to get Andre up to 7 feet.
And when you claim you've seen little if any real proof of Andre being under 6'11 has probably more to do with you ignoring all evidence that points towards a below 7' peak Andre. In the past year several height billings of Andre from the 60's have been put up here. Between 1965 and 1969 he has been billed 6'10 2/3 on more than just one occassion. In the UK he was billed 6'10 and referred to in various magazines as 6'11. But I guess that doesn't count as real proof!
dicksock says on 12/Feb/09
Any unbiased person can clearly see about 5" between Studd and Andre in that stardown. He towered over him.
Click Here
When both assume a similar posture the difference isn't even 4 inches. If Andre is 5 inches taller and you claim Studd is a minimum of 6'7 and has a footwear advantage I take it you still think is Andre is 7'+ by 1989???
You probably only look at pictures like this to think the difference is 5"
Click Here
The fact that Andre is lifting his head backwards probably went unnoticed by you. It does surprise me that you always seem to be seeing the exact amount of inches that's needed to get Andre up to 7 feet.
And when you claim you've seen little if any real proof of Andre being under 6'11 has probably more to do with you ignoring all evidence that points towards a below 7' peak Andre. In the past year several height billings of Andre from the 60's have been put up here. Between 1965 and 1969 he has been billed 6'10 2/3 on more than just one occassion. In the UK he was billed 6'10 and referred to in various magazines as 6'11. But I guess that doesn't count as real proof!
mike said on 13/Feb/09
anonymous andre wasnever measured at 7'4",he was billed and promoted at 7'4".imo andre was peak 7,0".
anonymous andre wasnever measured at 7'4",he was billed and promoted at 7'4".imo andre was peak 7,0".
JT said on 13/Feb/09
Big Show, I don
Big Show, I don
dicksock said on 12/Feb/09
Any unbiased person can clearly see about 5" between Studd and Andre in that stardown. He towered over him. Also, there is an undeniable minimum of 7" between Roberts and Andre. I've seen very little if any real proof of Andre being under 6'11. The vast majority of evidence shows him at 6'11.5" to 7'0.5" at his tallest.
Any unbiased person can clearly see about 5" between Studd and Andre in that stardown. He towered over him. Also, there is an undeniable minimum of 7" between Roberts and Andre. I've seen very little if any real proof of Andre being under 6'11. The vast majority of evidence shows him at 6'11.5" to 7'0.5" at his tallest.
aram x said on 12/Feb/09
7,4"? that's absurd! well at least Andre is closer to 7,4" than Stadnik's ridiculous 8,5" claim lol...
7,4"? that's absurd! well at least Andre is closer to 7,4" than Stadnik's ridiculous 8,5" claim lol...
Ghost said on 12/Feb/09
general93 says on 11/Feb/09
ghost hogan who was the most famous wrestler in history was billed 6'8" 303lbs they do anything to make him the best biggest strongest etc hogan said himself his through tallest was 6'7" and that was back then (80s) he weighed 21st 294lbs y didnt they bill him 6'10 350lbs.hogan says today hes about 6'4".so yes i do think omg was 6'8" billed 6'9" and todays billings are just as bad if not worse kurt angle 6'2" holly 6'6" sid 7ftwcw kane 7ft big show 7'5"wcw.
If Hogan SAYING he was 6'7 in his youth is enough proof to you of his height, then that's it then. However, don't forget Hogan also has said things like Andre having been 700 lbs at WM3 and dying shortly after the event. He likes to blow things out of proportion.
I personally don't think Hogan was over 6'5,5 in his prime.
DiBiase I think was about 6'2,5-6'3 in his prime. He looks shorter these days.
general93 says on 11/Feb/09
ghost hogan who was the most famous wrestler in history was billed 6'8" 303lbs they do anything to make him the best biggest strongest etc hogan said himself his through tallest was 6'7" and that was back then (80s) he weighed 21st 294lbs y didnt they bill him 6'10 350lbs.hogan says today hes about 6'4".so yes i do think omg was 6'8" billed 6'9" and todays billings are just as bad if not worse kurt angle 6'2" holly 6'6" sid 7ftwcw kane 7ft big show 7'5"wcw.
If Hogan SAYING he was 6'7 in his youth is enough proof to you of his height, then that's it then. However, don't forget Hogan also has said things like Andre having been 700 lbs at WM3 and dying shortly after the event. He likes to blow things out of proportion.
I personally don't think Hogan was over 6'5,5 in his prime.
DiBiase I think was about 6'2,5-6'3 in his prime. He looks shorter these days.
Ivan Jaginoff said on 12/Feb/09
Andre was never 7'4", that's a lie! he's only 6'11"
Andre was never 7'4", that's a lie! he's only 6'11"
Danimal said on 11/Feb/09
Vegas says on 11/Feb/09
i met duggan last year, he is ~6'2 and was wearing dress shoes, i doubt he has lost any height even though he is early 50s, carries himself really well and seem to be in very good physical condition unlike some wrestlers i have met over the years, duggan seemed at least an inch taller than ted dibiase on raw about 2 years back, duggan is one of the nicest wrestlers i have ever met along with mick foley
YEAH and Dibiase in his prime had at least an inch on Duggan: Click Here
Ted was at least 6'3" before his broken neck.
Vegas says on 11/Feb/09
i met duggan last year, he is ~6'2 and was wearing dress shoes, i doubt he has lost any height even though he is early 50s, carries himself really well and seem to be in very good physical condition unlike some wrestlers i have met over the years, duggan seemed at least an inch taller than ted dibiase on raw about 2 years back, duggan is one of the nicest wrestlers i have ever met along with mick foley
YEAH and Dibiase in his prime had at least an inch on Duggan: Click Here
Ted was at least 6'3" before his broken neck.
R Miller said on 11/Feb/09
If you look back to postings in the past, you will see a posting that I made quite some time ago. It's very difficult to argue with the world of science. Andre the Giant...maximum height....7'.25".
If you look back to postings in the past, you will see a posting that I made quite some time ago. It's very difficult to argue with the world of science. Andre the Giant...maximum height....7'.25".
JT said on 11/Feb/09
dicksock says on 10/Feb/09
dicksock says on 10/Feb/09
Big Show said on 11/Feb/09
Vegas says on 11/Feb/09
i met duggan last year, he is ~6'2 and was wearing dress shoes, i doubt he has lost any height even though he is early 50s, carries himself really well and seem to be in very good physical condition unlike some wrestlers i have met over the years, duggan seemed at least an inch taller than ted dibiase on raw about 2 years back, duggan is one of the nicest wrestlers i have ever met along with mick foley
Jim Duggan was a big guy. He always looked a solid 6'2-6'3 to me. I remember him guest starring once in an episode of Harry and the Hendersons and he certainly wasn't dwarfed by Kevin Peter Hall.
OMG is a strange one. He looked 6'6 if you would compare him to the likes of Hogan, Big John Studd, Andre & The Big Show, but when he teamed together with The Big Bossman I remember him not being that much taller than The Big Bossman (Bossman was probably having a footwear advantage).
Click Here
Click Here
Vegas says on 11/Feb/09
i met duggan last year, he is ~6'2 and was wearing dress shoes, i doubt he has lost any height even though he is early 50s, carries himself really well and seem to be in very good physical condition unlike some wrestlers i have met over the years, duggan seemed at least an inch taller than ted dibiase on raw about 2 years back, duggan is one of the nicest wrestlers i have ever met along with mick foley
Jim Duggan was a big guy. He always looked a solid 6'2-6'3 to me. I remember him guest starring once in an episode of Harry and the Hendersons and he certainly wasn't dwarfed by Kevin Peter Hall.
OMG is a strange one. He looked 6'6 if you would compare him to the likes of Hogan, Big John Studd, Andre & The Big Show, but when he teamed together with The Big Bossman I remember him not being that much taller than The Big Bossman (Bossman was probably having a footwear advantage).
Click Here
Click Here
Harley said on 11/Feb/09
I would guess andre's peak height at 7.05 later in life 6-10
I would guess andre's peak height at 7.05 later in life 6-10
general93 said on 11/Feb/09
ghost hogan who was the most famous wrestler in history was billed 6'8" 303lbs they do anything to make him the best biggest strongest etc hogan said himself his through tallest was 6'7" and that was back then (80s) he weighed 21st 294lbs y didnt they bill him 6'10 350lbs.hogan says today hes about 6'4".so yes i do think omg was 6'8" billed 6'9" and todays billings are just as bad if not worse kurt angle 6'2" holly 6'6" sid 7ftwcw kane 7ft big show 7'5"wcw.
ghost hogan who was the most famous wrestler in history was billed 6'8" 303lbs they do anything to make him the best biggest strongest etc hogan said himself his through tallest was 6'7" and that was back then (80s) he weighed 21st 294lbs y didnt they bill him 6'10 350lbs.hogan says today hes about 6'4".so yes i do think omg was 6'8" billed 6'9" and todays billings are just as bad if not worse kurt angle 6'2" holly 6'6" sid 7ftwcw kane 7ft big show 7'5"wcw.
Vegas said on 11/Feb/09
i met duggan last year, he is ~6'2 and was wearing dress shoes, i doubt he has lost any height even though he is early 50s, carries himself really well and seem to be in very good physical condition unlike some wrestlers i have met over the years, duggan seemed at least an inch taller than ted dibiase on raw about 2 years back, duggan is one of the nicest wrestlers i have ever met along with mick foley
i met duggan last year, he is ~6'2 and was wearing dress shoes, i doubt he has lost any height even though he is early 50s, carries himself really well and seem to be in very good physical condition unlike some wrestlers i have met over the years, duggan seemed at least an inch taller than ted dibiase on raw about 2 years back, duggan is one of the nicest wrestlers i have ever met along with mick foley
dicksock said on 10/Feb/09
Based on a staredown I've seen with Hacksaw Jim Duggan and OMG I'd say OMG was about 3-4" taller at most. So if Duggan was a peak 6'3, then that makes a 6'6.5 OMG. That is also the lowest I'd go for Big John Studd. However, John Studd did concede a good bit of height to an old Andre at WM 5. Andre looked about 5" taller than Studd and Studd had a slight footware advantage.
Based on a staredown I've seen with Hacksaw Jim Duggan and OMG I'd say OMG was about 3-4" taller at most. So if Duggan was a peak 6'3, then that makes a 6'6.5 OMG. That is also the lowest I'd go for Big John Studd. However, John Studd did concede a good bit of height to an old Andre at WM 5. Andre looked about 5" taller than Studd and Studd had a slight footware advantage.
Red said on 10/Feb/09
general mistakes
general mistakes
omar g said on 10/Feb/09
general93,you are right one man gang now adays is still a tall man.i saw him standing next to bob orton and randy orton about 1 year ago at a convention in los angeles and he completley dwarfed randy orton who i believe is a legit 6'4 and cowbow bob has to at least be 6'0 even maybe a tad taller.the only thing that looked different about one man gang was that he looked way thinner now than he did.at least 150 pounds thinner,which of course made him look taller.also my guess is that i always thought sid was taller than his 6'7 listing.because in their prime taker could have been up to 6'8.5 which could make sid 6'8.but im safe to say that he was a legit 6'7 absolutly nothing less than that.
general93,you are right one man gang now adays is still a tall man.i saw him standing next to bob orton and randy orton about 1 year ago at a convention in los angeles and he completley dwarfed randy orton who i believe is a legit 6'4 and cowbow bob has to at least be 6'0 even maybe a tad taller.the only thing that looked different about one man gang was that he looked way thinner now than he did.at least 150 pounds thinner,which of course made him look taller.also my guess is that i always thought sid was taller than his 6'7 listing.because in their prime taker could have been up to 6'8.5 which could make sid 6'8.but im safe to say that he was a legit 6'7 absolutly nothing less than that.
Ghost said on 10/Feb/09
general93 says on 10/Feb/09
if u look at the match between andre and kamala on youtube look at 2:22 to the end and he looks his full 7'4" but id still say 7'2".everyone says 6'7" for sid all the time but id say he was at least 6'8" once upon a time.and again stud was taller than hogan and didnt look shorter than ernie ladd in their tag match.he was the same height as akeem who was easily 6'8" george gray is now around 6'6.5"-7".stud was billed 6'10" omg akeem 6'9".
So you honestly believe they would bill a 6'8 guy as only 6'9 in the 80s, when 6'8 Kane is billed 7 feet today and there are alot more extremely tall wrestlers around these days?
general93 says on 10/Feb/09
if u look at the match between andre and kamala on youtube look at 2:22 to the end and he looks his full 7'4" but id still say 7'2".everyone says 6'7" for sid all the time but id say he was at least 6'8" once upon a time.and again stud was taller than hogan and didnt look shorter than ernie ladd in their tag match.he was the same height as akeem who was easily 6'8" george gray is now around 6'6.5"-7".stud was billed 6'10" omg akeem 6'9".
So you honestly believe they would bill a 6'8 guy as only 6'9 in the 80s, when 6'8 Kane is billed 7 feet today and there are alot more extremely tall wrestlers around these days?
Boss said on 10/Feb/09
Andre 7' peak 6'10 later
Big Show 7' peak(looked 7'1 or almost 7'2 in ring in WCW aka 1.5 inch souled boots) 6'11 now
Hogan 6'6 peak roughly 6'4 now
Big John Studd 6'7
Earthquake 6'5 3/4
Ladd 6'9
Haystacks 6'9 peak 6'7 later
Jake Roberts 6'5 peak
HillBilly Jim 6'5.5 peak
Monsoon 6'4
Bundy 6'3
Andre 7' peak 6'10 later
Big Show 7' peak(looked 7'1 or almost 7'2 in ring in WCW aka 1.5 inch souled boots) 6'11 now
Hogan 6'6 peak roughly 6'4 now
Big John Studd 6'7
Earthquake 6'5 3/4
Ladd 6'9
Haystacks 6'9 peak 6'7 later
Jake Roberts 6'5 peak
HillBilly Jim 6'5.5 peak
Monsoon 6'4
Bundy 6'3
general93 said on 10/Feb/09
if u look at the match between andre and kamala on youtube look at 2:22 to the end and he looks his full 7'4" but id still say 7'2".everyone says 6'7" for sid all the time but id say he was at least 6'8" once upon a time.and again stud was taller than hogan and didnt look shorter than ernie ladd in their tag match.he was the same height as akeem who was easily 6'8" george gray is now around 6'6.5"-7".stud was billed 6'10" omg akeem 6'9".
if u look at the match between andre and kamala on youtube look at 2:22 to the end and he looks his full 7'4" but id still say 7'2".everyone says 6'7" for sid all the time but id say he was at least 6'8" once upon a time.and again stud was taller than hogan and didnt look shorter than ernie ladd in their tag match.he was the same height as akeem who was easily 6'8" george gray is now around 6'6.5"-7".stud was billed 6'10" omg akeem 6'9".
dicksock said on 10/Feb/09
iClarke-93 says on 10/Feb/09
list of heights
Andre 7'0.25 (Peak) 6'10-6'10.5 later in life
Hogan 6'6 (Peak) 6'4 (now)
Big John Studd 6'7.25
Earthquake 6'6
Ernie Ladd 6'9
Undertaker 6'8 (Peak) 6'7.5 nowadays
Kane 6'8
Haystacks 6'9 (peak) 6'7.5 later
Jake Roberts 6'5 (peak) 6'4.5 nowadays
Giant Gonzalez 7'6
Greg "The Hammer" Valentine 5'10
King Kong Bundy 6'3
Mabel 6'6.5
Sid 6'7
That's the most reasonable list I've seen so far.
iClarke-93 says on 10/Feb/09
list of heights
Andre 7'0.25 (Peak) 6'10-6'10.5 later in life
Hogan 6'6 (Peak) 6'4 (now)
Big John Studd 6'7.25
Earthquake 6'6
Ernie Ladd 6'9
Undertaker 6'8 (Peak) 6'7.5 nowadays
Kane 6'8
Haystacks 6'9 (peak) 6'7.5 later
Jake Roberts 6'5 (peak) 6'4.5 nowadays
Giant Gonzalez 7'6
Greg "The Hammer" Valentine 5'10
King Kong Bundy 6'3
Mabel 6'6.5
Sid 6'7
That's the most reasonable list I've seen so far.
iClarke-93 said on 10/Feb/09
list of heights
Andre 7'0.25 (Peak) 6'10-6'10.5 later in life
Hogan 6'6 (Peak) 6'4 (now)
Big John Studd 6'7.25
Earthquake 6'6
Ernie Ladd 6'9
Undertaker 6'8 (Peak) 6'7.5 nowadays
Kane 6'8
Haystacks 6'9 (peak) 6'7.5 later
Jake Roberts 6'5 (peak) 6'4.5 nowadays
Giant Gonzalez 7'6
Greg "The Hammer" Valentine 5'10
King Kong Bundy 6'3
Mabel 6'6.5
Sid 6'7
list of heights
Andre 7'0.25 (Peak) 6'10-6'10.5 later in life
Hogan 6'6 (Peak) 6'4 (now)
Big John Studd 6'7.25
Earthquake 6'6
Ernie Ladd 6'9
Undertaker 6'8 (Peak) 6'7.5 nowadays
Kane 6'8
Haystacks 6'9 (peak) 6'7.5 later
Jake Roberts 6'5 (peak) 6'4.5 nowadays
Giant Gonzalez 7'6
Greg "The Hammer" Valentine 5'10
King Kong Bundy 6'3
Mabel 6'6.5
Sid 6'7
Boss said on 10/Feb/09
The camera angle is horrible in those pics. They are no good for height comparisons.
The camera angle is horrible in those pics. They are no good for height comparisons.
Big Show said on 10/Feb/09
Halb says on 10/Feb/09
That's really Andre in those pics?
Yeah, these pics were taken just over a week after Andre turned 23.
Halb says on 10/Feb/09
That's really Andre in those pics?
Yeah, these pics were taken just over a week after Andre turned 23.
Halb said on 10/Feb/09
That's really Andre in those pics?
That's really Andre in those pics?
Chaz said on 9/Feb/09
Elrington was at least 6'4''.he was like Pat Roach, in a lot of TV shows in the late 1960s-70s in the UK like the Avengers allways playing the giant bodygard or villan,he was in the 280-300LBS weight range.
Elrington was at least 6'4''.he was like Pat Roach, in a lot of TV shows in the late 1960s-70s in the UK like the Avengers allways playing the giant bodygard or villan,he was in the 280-300LBS weight range.
omar g said on 9/Feb/09
i remember seeing andre at the los angeles sports arena in 1985 and he looked huge next to my friend who was 6'7.but what made him look huge was not his height but his enormous mass.i think andre could of been as tall as 6'11 in 1985.but what im saying is that even if andre was only 6'6 or 6'7 he would still seem taller because of his exaggerating features,but he wasnt 6'6 he was at least 6'11.so in my opinion and im sure in the opinion of others andre was a true real giant.there might be oyhers that are taller but andre for sure was the biggest.
i remember seeing andre at the los angeles sports arena in 1985 and he looked huge next to my friend who was 6'7.but what made him look huge was not his height but his enormous mass.i think andre could of been as tall as 6'11 in 1985.but what im saying is that even if andre was only 6'6 or 6'7 he would still seem taller because of his exaggerating features,but he wasnt 6'6 he was at least 6'11.so in my opinion and im sure in the opinion of others andre was a true real giant.there might be oyhers that are taller but andre for sure was the biggest.
Big Show said on 9/Feb/09
Click Here
Here are a few action pics of a wrestling match between Andre the Giant and Big Bruno Elrington from May 1969. Too bad there are no comparisons between the two, as that would be a good one. Bruno Elrington was a big man himself (he was billed at 6'5 thoughout most of his career, though I've heard him being referred as 6'4 aswell).
Click Here
Here are a few action pics of a wrestling match between Andre the Giant and Big Bruno Elrington from May 1969. Too bad there are no comparisons between the two, as that would be a good one. Bruno Elrington was a big man himself (he was billed at 6'5 thoughout most of his career, though I've heard him being referred as 6'4 aswell).
Anonymous said on 9/Feb/09
Andre was just as tall as he ever was when he died, his posture was god awful towards the end of his life and he really couldn't help that. He was 7'4 the last time he was measured, officially, anything below is just to insult really.
Andre was just as tall as he ever was when he died, his posture was god awful towards the end of his life and he really couldn't help that. He was 7'4 the last time he was measured, officially, anything below is just to insult really.
dicksock said on 8/Feb/09
omar g says on 7/Feb/09
general93,i think taker had hogan by more than 1 inch in 91,more like 2-3 inches.remember taker edged out sid by 1/2 inch from 91-92 and if you compare hogan and sid from the 1992 royal rumble,sid had hogan by at least 2-2 1/2 inches easily.so taker was 6'8 peak,hogan 6'5 - 6'5.5 and stud always had hogan only by 1-maybe sometimes closer to 2 inches during there steele cage and title matches from 1984.
I've seen the two title matches between UT and Hogan many times and there is no way he had Hogan by 3". There was 2" at the absolute most between them. Sid had Hogan by less than 2" at WM 8. That staredown was a joke. Sid was lifting his head so much that it was crazy. In my opinion a peak UT would be about 6'8, Sid would be 6'7.5 and Hogan about 6'6.
omar g says on 7/Feb/09
general93,i think taker had hogan by more than 1 inch in 91,more like 2-3 inches.remember taker edged out sid by 1/2 inch from 91-92 and if you compare hogan and sid from the 1992 royal rumble,sid had hogan by at least 2-2 1/2 inches easily.so taker was 6'8 peak,hogan 6'5 - 6'5.5 and stud always had hogan only by 1-maybe sometimes closer to 2 inches during there steele cage and title matches from 1984.
I've seen the two title matches between UT and Hogan many times and there is no way he had Hogan by 3". There was 2" at the absolute most between them. Sid had Hogan by less than 2" at WM 8. That staredown was a joke. Sid was lifting his head so much that it was crazy. In my opinion a peak UT would be about 6'8, Sid would be 6'7.5 and Hogan about 6'6.
willy79 said on 8/Feb/09
general93 says on 4/Feb/09
list of heights:
hogan 6'7" prime now 6'4" 6'6 PRIME, 6'4NOW
nash 6'10.5" AGREE
taker 6'9" now 6'7.5" 6'8 PRIME, 6'7 NOW
studd 6'8.75" later 6'7" 6'7 PERIOD
mable 6'8" 6'7 PERIOD
kane 6'9" ROUGHLY 6'8.5
ernie ladd 6'9" AGREE
andre 7'2" prime 6'11" late PRIME 7'1 LATE 6'10.5
haystacks 6'10" prime 6'8" late 6'9 PRIME, 6'7 LATE
sid 6'8" 6'7
earthquake 6'6.5" 6'6
jake roberts 6'4.5" 6'5
gonzalez 7'7"
silo sam 7'5" 7'4
paul white 7'1" now 6'11.75" AGREE
general93 says on 4/Feb/09
list of heights:
hogan 6'7" prime now 6'4" 6'6 PRIME, 6'4NOW
nash 6'10.5" AGREE
taker 6'9" now 6'7.5" 6'8 PRIME, 6'7 NOW
studd 6'8.75" later 6'7" 6'7 PERIOD
mable 6'8" 6'7 PERIOD
kane 6'9" ROUGHLY 6'8.5
ernie ladd 6'9" AGREE
andre 7'2" prime 6'11" late PRIME 7'1 LATE 6'10.5
haystacks 6'10" prime 6'8" late 6'9 PRIME, 6'7 LATE
sid 6'8" 6'7
earthquake 6'6.5" 6'6
jake roberts 6'4.5" 6'5
gonzalez 7'7"
silo sam 7'5" 7'4
paul white 7'1" now 6'11.75" AGREE
Danimal said on 8/Feb/09
Remember guys, he was only 46 years old at the time of his death, which is still pretty young and for most men, their is little to know height loss by 46 years. MAYBE .25" at most. Just look at Andre's neck at a young age and then in his later years (how HUNCHED and compressed it became). He developed a hump and his legs became shaky and buckled. A peak Andre fresh out of bed would have been 7'0.25" imo. He very well could have been down to 6'9"-6'10" by the time of his death.
Remember guys, he was only 46 years old at the time of his death, which is still pretty young and for most men, their is little to know height loss by 46 years. MAYBE .25" at most. Just look at Andre's neck at a young age and then in his later years (how HUNCHED and compressed it became). He developed a hump and his legs became shaky and buckled. A peak Andre fresh out of bed would have been 7'0.25" imo. He very well could have been down to 6'9"-6'10" by the time of his death.
Ghost said on 8/Feb/09
aram x says on 7/Feb/09
So his height decreased by about 2.25-2.25" from his peak. That sounds about reasonable because like I already mentioned, Andre never suffered from severe height shrinkage (well pretty bad shrinkage but nowhere near 'terrible' unlike some other giants and other notable ppl).
The thing is, the comparison pictures of young and old Andre next to mean Gene for example really don't show that shrinkage at all. I don't think he lost more than 1,5 inches really, if even that.
aram x says on 7/Feb/09
So his height decreased by about 2.25-2.25" from his peak. That sounds about reasonable because like I already mentioned, Andre never suffered from severe height shrinkage (well pretty bad shrinkage but nowhere near 'terrible' unlike some other giants and other notable ppl).
The thing is, the comparison pictures of young and old Andre next to mean Gene for example really don't show that shrinkage at all. I don't think he lost more than 1,5 inches really, if even that.
aram x said on 7/Feb/09
So his height decreased by about 2.25-2.25" from his peak. That sounds about reasonable because like I already mentioned, Andre never suffered from severe height shrinkage (well pretty bad shrinkage but nowhere near 'terrible' unlike some other giants and other notable ppl).
So his height decreased by about 2.25-2.25" from his peak. That sounds about reasonable because like I already mentioned, Andre never suffered from severe height shrinkage (well pretty bad shrinkage but nowhere near 'terrible' unlike some other giants and other notable ppl).
sidewalk said on 7/Feb/09
I've seen many pictures and old wrestling posters people have found I think it's safe to say Andre was between 6'10-7'. I don't believe anything less than that for peak height. Maybe he was slightly under 6'10 last few months of his life. He was definately taller then Tyler Mane. I'm not a big fan of the shrinking theories but Andre had to have lost some height, he was in terrible condition. I personally think Andre was 6'11-6'11.5 with a small chance at 7'. absolute lowest for peak 6'10 and I myself think more like 6'10.5
I've seen many pictures and old wrestling posters people have found I think it's safe to say Andre was between 6'10-7'. I don't believe anything less than that for peak height. Maybe he was slightly under 6'10 last few months of his life. He was definately taller then Tyler Mane. I'm not a big fan of the shrinking theories but Andre had to have lost some height, he was in terrible condition. I personally think Andre was 6'11-6'11.5 with a small chance at 7'. absolute lowest for peak 6'10 and I myself think more like 6'10.5
ancient Aztec Guy said on 7/Feb/09
I would give Andre about 7'0" at the very least for a peak height estimation. He could easily have been the same height as Wilt Chamberlain, in my opinion. For peak I would give him no more than 7'1.5", in my estimation.
I would give Andre about 7'0" at the very least for a peak height estimation. He could easily have been the same height as Wilt Chamberlain, in my opinion. For peak I would give him no more than 7'1.5", in my estimation.
Boss said on 7/Feb/09
I remember watching a news station that reported he was 6' 10 at time of death on his autopsy report. I was thinking 6'10 I thought he was taller than that. So between 6'11 and 7' sounds right for his peak because he would have lost at least 1.5 to 2 inches over his life especially with his condition, surgery, slouching and excessive weight gain.
I remember watching a news station that reported he was 6' 10 at time of death on his autopsy report. I was thinking 6'10 I thought he was taller than that. So between 6'11 and 7' sounds right for his peak because he would have lost at least 1.5 to 2 inches over his life especially with his condition, surgery, slouching and excessive weight gain.
omar g said on 7/Feb/09
general93,i think taker had hogan by more than 1 inch in 91,more like 2-3 inches.remember taker edged out sid by 1/2 inch from 91-92 and if you compare hogan and sid from the 1992 royal rumble,sid had hogan by at least 2-2 1/2 inches easily.so taker was 6'8 peak,hogan 6'5 - 6'5.5 and stud always had hogan only by 1-maybe sometimes closer to 2 inches during there steele cage and title matches from 1984.
general93,i think taker had hogan by more than 1 inch in 91,more like 2-3 inches.remember taker edged out sid by 1/2 inch from 91-92 and if you compare hogan and sid from the 1992 royal rumble,sid had hogan by at least 2-2 1/2 inches easily.so taker was 6'8 peak,hogan 6'5 - 6'5.5 and stud always had hogan only by 1-maybe sometimes closer to 2 inches during there steele cage and title matches from 1984.
Red said on 7/Feb/09
general93 says on 6/Feb/09
omar g u have stud less than taker by 1.5" but stud easily had peak hogan 1986 by 2" wereas taker only had him by 1" in 91 and maybe 2" in 2002
No, Taker had Hogan by 2 inches in 1991 and about 4 inches in 2002. Studd was max 1 inch taller than Hogan, so Taker would
general93 says on 6/Feb/09
omar g u have stud less than taker by 1.5" but stud easily had peak hogan 1986 by 2" wereas taker only had him by 1" in 91 and maybe 2" in 2002
No, Taker had Hogan by 2 inches in 1991 and about 4 inches in 2002. Studd was max 1 inch taller than Hogan, so Taker would
Ghost said on 7/Feb/09
Many pics prove Andre suprsingly didn't loose 2 or more inches of height.
6'11 or 6'11,5 sounds good for his prime as does 6'10 for his late years.
I haven't really seen a pic where even a young Andre would look over 7 feet tall.
Towards the very end his posture was horrendous which made him look 6'9-6'8 on occasion.
Many pics prove Andre suprsingly didn't loose 2 or more inches of height.
6'11 or 6'11,5 sounds good for his prime as does 6'10 for his late years.
I haven't really seen a pic where even a young Andre would look over 7 feet tall.
Towards the very end his posture was horrendous which made him look 6'9-6'8 on occasion.
Halb said on 7/Feb/09
general93 says on 6/Feb/09
omar g u have stud less than taker by 1.5" but stud easily had peak hogan 1986 by 2" wereas taker only had him by 1" in 91 and maybe 2" in 2002.stud and taker were both billed 6'10".
Taker was around 3 inches taller than Hogan in the battle Royal mid '91. Comparing billing doesn't always work, e.g. TBS and Kane, boith billed at 7 when Show dwarfs Kane.
general93 says on 6/Feb/09
omar g u have stud less than taker by 1.5" but stud easily had peak hogan 1986 by 2" wereas taker only had him by 1" in 91 and maybe 2" in 2002.stud and taker were both billed 6'10".
Taker was around 3 inches taller than Hogan in the battle Royal mid '91. Comparing billing doesn't always work, e.g. TBS and Kane, boith billed at 7 when Show dwarfs Kane.
Danimal said on 6/Feb/09
I believe he was just under 6'10" his last day on earth and just over a flat 7'0" at his tallest.
I believe he was just under 6'10" his last day on earth and just over a flat 7'0" at his tallest.
Clay said on 6/Feb/09
He was never as low as 6'8.
He was never as low as 6'8.
aram x said on 6/Feb/09
I guess his height loss wasn't that bad. He lost maybe 2 inches of height from bad posture but that was about it. No way is it anywhere near 4" because he never developed kyphoscolosis.
I guess his height loss wasn't that bad. He lost maybe 2 inches of height from bad posture but that was about it. No way is it anywhere near 4" because he never developed kyphoscolosis.
general93 said on 6/Feb/09
omar g u have stud less than taker by 1.5" but stud easily had peak hogan 1986 by 2" wereas taker only had him by 1" in 91 and maybe 2" in 2002.stud and taker were both billed 6'10".
omar g u have stud less than taker by 1.5" but stud easily had peak hogan 1986 by 2" wereas taker only had him by 1" in 91 and maybe 2" in 2002.stud and taker were both billed 6'10".
Anonymous said on 6/Feb/09
aram x ,
You are right about Andre's peak height but even in his later years he was still a good 6'10.
aram x ,
You are right about Andre's peak height but even in his later years he was still a good 6'10.
omar g said on 6/Feb/09
i went to a tna show in ontario,ca.on oct 31 08 and i saw kevin nash heading to his car.he looks a little shorter than when he was diesel in 1993.i think hes lost some height over the years.but he compares about the height andre was in the 80's.it kind of makes sence because look at the pictures of nash with tyler mane,then look at the pictures with andre and tyler mane.it looks like andre and nash were about the same height.but as far as big and girth andre takes the cake.thats what made him a giant.abnormaly huge hands,feet,head,back,thighs,torso
i went to a tna show in ontario,ca.on oct 31 08 and i saw kevin nash heading to his car.he looks a little shorter than when he was diesel in 1993.i think hes lost some height over the years.but he compares about the height andre was in the 80's.it kind of makes sence because look at the pictures of nash with tyler mane,then look at the pictures with andre and tyler mane.it looks like andre and nash were about the same height.but as far as big and girth andre takes the cake.thats what made him a giant.abnormaly huge hands,feet,head,back,thighs,torso
Red said on 6/Feb/09
aram x
6
aram x
6
Boss said on 6/Feb/09
6' 11.5 might be exact for Andre's peak height. 6'10 later in life.
6' 11.5 might be exact for Andre's peak height. 6'10 later in life.
aram x said on 5/Feb/09
Andre the Giant was probably around 7' to 7,1" during his prime as the pics with Chamberlain prove, but afterwards, his height was probably as low as 6,8".
Andre the Giant was probably around 7' to 7,1" during his prime as the pics with Chamberlain prove, but afterwards, his height was probably as low as 6,8".
omar g said on 5/Feb/09
general93 you might be off a little.
mable 6'6
hogan 6'5.5
undertaker 6'8
studd 6'6.5-6'7
kane 6'7.5-6'8
andre 6'11
haystacks 6'8
sid 6'7
i think this might be correct.
general93 you might be off a little.
mable 6'6
hogan 6'5.5
undertaker 6'8
studd 6'6.5-6'7
kane 6'7.5-6'8
andre 6'11
haystacks 6'8
sid 6'7
i think this might be correct.
Red said on 5/Feb/09
Shock of Electric says on 4/Feb/09
by WM3, Andre was down to about 6'10.75" compared to peak Hogan 6'6"
It
Shock of Electric says on 4/Feb/09
by WM3, Andre was down to about 6'10.75" compared to peak Hogan 6'6"
It
Shock of Electric said on 4/Feb/09
by WM3, Andre was down to about 6'10.75" compared to peak Hogan 6'6"
by WM3, Andre was down to about 6'10.75" compared to peak Hogan 6'6"
general93 said on 4/Feb/09
list of heights:
hogan 6'7" prime now 6'4"
nash 6'10.5"
taker 6'9" now 6'7.5"
studd 6'8.75" later 6'7"
mable 6'8"
kane 6'9"
ernie ladd 6'9"
andre 7'2" prime 6'11" late
haystacks 6'10" prime 6'8" late
sid 6'8"
earthquake 6'6.5"
jake roberts 6'4.5"
gonzalez 7'7"
silo sam 7'5"
paul white 7'1" now 6'11.75"
list of heights:
hogan 6'7" prime now 6'4"
nash 6'10.5"
taker 6'9" now 6'7.5"
studd 6'8.75" later 6'7"
mable 6'8"
kane 6'9"
ernie ladd 6'9"
andre 7'2" prime 6'11" late
haystacks 6'10" prime 6'8" late
sid 6'8"
earthquake 6'6.5"
jake roberts 6'4.5"
gonzalez 7'7"
silo sam 7'5"
paul white 7'1" now 6'11.75"
Halb said on 3/Feb/09
There is a good staredown from Shea stadium from 81ish I think, I don't think the diff is 6 inches.
There is a good staredown from Shea stadium from 81ish I think, I don't think the diff is 6 inches.
dicksock said on 3/Feb/09
Here is a great clip on youtube: Hulk Hogan vs. Andre the Giant - NJPW, 9/12/1982 (part 1)
It shows Andre towering over Hulk Hogan. There was at least 6" between them in Andre's prime.
Here is a great clip on youtube: Hulk Hogan vs. Andre the Giant - NJPW, 9/12/1982 (part 1)
It shows Andre towering over Hulk Hogan. There was at least 6" between them in Andre's prime.
Danimal said on 3/Feb/09
Big Show says on 2/Feb/09
Danimal says on 1/Feb/09
This is so sad. This is Andre The Giant's VERY LAST television appearance in 1992. He can't stand up without two sticks and is MORBIDLY obese. Fast forward to 2:05 Click Here
That segment was from September 2, 1992. It was his last television appearance in the USA. Andre still appeared on tv in Japan & Mexico after that.
The reason Andre is walking on crutches there is probably because he had knee surgery. He didn't wrestle between July and October, so he was probably recovering.
Andre made what was to be his final tour through Japan in October & November 1992. In December he wrestled at least one match in Mexico. Here's a match of him from late October 1992.
Click Here
Andre can still walk without crutches, but is a physical mess. Morbidly obese and his knees can hardly support his weight anymore. It wasn't long until after this match that Andre retired from wrestling in December 1992.
And sadly DIED the following month.
Big Show says on 2/Feb/09
Danimal says on 1/Feb/09
This is so sad. This is Andre The Giant's VERY LAST television appearance in 1992. He can't stand up without two sticks and is MORBIDLY obese. Fast forward to 2:05 Click Here
That segment was from September 2, 1992. It was his last television appearance in the USA. Andre still appeared on tv in Japan & Mexico after that.
The reason Andre is walking on crutches there is probably because he had knee surgery. He didn't wrestle between July and October, so he was probably recovering.
Andre made what was to be his final tour through Japan in October & November 1992. In December he wrestled at least one match in Mexico. Here's a match of him from late October 1992.
Click Here
Andre can still walk without crutches, but is a physical mess. Morbidly obese and his knees can hardly support his weight anymore. It wasn't long until after this match that Andre retired from wrestling in December 1992.
And sadly DIED the following month.
Chris said on 3/Feb/09
dicksock - Studd typically came up to Andre's eyebrows. John's use of HgH, at this time, caused to bodyweight to increase considerably since their last run together in 1985...so the size difference was not as great.
I have quite a few photos of Andre that I personally took back in 1988 and 1989...here are a couple more ....Hope you enjoy.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
dicksock - Studd typically came up to Andre's eyebrows. John's use of HgH, at this time, caused to bodyweight to increase considerably since their last run together in 1985...so the size difference was not as great.
I have quite a few photos of Andre that I personally took back in 1988 and 1989...here are a couple more ....Hope you enjoy.
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
dicksock said on 2/Feb/09
Chris says on 2/Feb/09
Hi guys-
I thought some of you might want to see a couple of photos that I personally took of Andre back in 1989. It was from a "dark" match at a Saturday Night's Main Event in Des Moines, Iowa.
Click Here
Click Here
Very cool pictures. So you were appearently very close to a Andre/Studd match. How did they compare live in your opinion?
Chris says on 2/Feb/09
Hi guys-
I thought some of you might want to see a couple of photos that I personally took of Andre back in 1989. It was from a "dark" match at a Saturday Night's Main Event in Des Moines, Iowa.
Click Here
Click Here
Very cool pictures. So you were appearently very close to a Andre/Studd match. How did they compare live in your opinion?
Chris said on 2/Feb/09
Hi guys-
I thought some of you might want to see a couple of photos that I personally took of Andre back in 1989. It was from a "dark" match at a Saturday Night's Main Event in Des Moines, Iowa.
Click Here
Click Here
Hi guys-
I thought some of you might want to see a couple of photos that I personally took of Andre back in 1989. It was from a "dark" match at a Saturday Night's Main Event in Des Moines, Iowa.
Click Here
Click Here
Big Show said on 2/Feb/09
Danimal says on 1/Feb/09
This is so sad. This is Andre The Giant's VERY LAST television appearance in 1992. He can't stand up without two sticks and is MORBIDLY obese. Fast forward to 2:05 Click Here
That segment was from September 2, 1992. It was his last television appearance in the USA. Andre still appeared on tv in Japan & Mexico after that.
The reason Andre is walking on crutches there is probably because he had knee surgery. He didn't wrestle between July and October, so he was probably recovering.
Andre made what was to be his final tour through Japan in October & November 1992. In December he wrestled at least one match in Mexico. Here's a match of him from late October 1992.
Click Here
Andre can still walk without crutches, but is a physical mess. Morbidly obese and his knees can hardly support his weight anymore. It wasn't long until after this match that Andre retired from wrestling in December 1992.
Danimal says on 1/Feb/09
This is so sad. This is Andre The Giant's VERY LAST television appearance in 1992. He can't stand up without two sticks and is MORBIDLY obese. Fast forward to 2:05 Click Here
That segment was from September 2, 1992. It was his last television appearance in the USA. Andre still appeared on tv in Japan & Mexico after that.
The reason Andre is walking on crutches there is probably because he had knee surgery. He didn't wrestle between July and October, so he was probably recovering.
Andre made what was to be his final tour through Japan in October & November 1992. In December he wrestled at least one match in Mexico. Here's a match of him from late October 1992.
Click Here
Andre can still walk without crutches, but is a physical mess. Morbidly obese and his knees can hardly support his weight anymore. It wasn't long until after this match that Andre retired from wrestling in December 1992.
Tony said on 2/Feb/09
6 FT 11.5 in sounds correct, Wilt is 7ft 1 in and is and inch and 1/2 taller.
6 FT 11.5 in sounds correct, Wilt is 7ft 1 in and is and inch and 1/2 taller.
omar g said on 1/Feb/09
the andre book also brings back memories of me watching and believing those interviews given by studd and heenan.those were classic interviews.back then you really believed that those two hated each other(andre,and studd)also it states in the book that andre disliked studd and gave him a hard time and the boys in the loker room were telling studd that andre was planning on hurting studd and was going to shoot on him.so it states that studd was so scared and shaken that he went to vinces office and refused to go in the ring with andre.it states that he was so scared of andre that he quit the company right after meeting with mcmahon.
the andre book also brings back memories of me watching and believing those interviews given by studd and heenan.those were classic interviews.back then you really believed that those two hated each other(andre,and studd)also it states in the book that andre disliked studd and gave him a hard time and the boys in the loker room were telling studd that andre was planning on hurting studd and was going to shoot on him.so it states that studd was so scared and shaken that he went to vinces office and refused to go in the ring with andre.it states that he was so scared of andre that he quit the company right after meeting with mcmahon.
Danimal said on 1/Feb/09
This is so sad. This is Andre The Giant's VERY LAST television appearance in 1992. He can't stand up without two sticks and is MORBIDLY obese. Fast forward to 2:05 Click Here
This is so sad. This is Andre The Giant's VERY LAST television appearance in 1992. He can't stand up without two sticks and is MORBIDLY obese. Fast forward to 2:05 Click Here
Lebowski said on 30/Jan/09
Thanks very much BigShow for the Andre the Giant link with Tito Kopa! He has got the be the shortest wrestler ever! And he is overselling soooo badly, its fun! He is like 2 feet shorter than Andre, can we have a page for him here?!? :-)
I would have never believed that Andre the Giant actually performed a tombstone piledriver if I had not witnessed it peronsally in this video! thanks for that!
It is quite hard to judge his height, since all the other guys are rather short
Thanks very much BigShow for the Andre the Giant link with Tito Kopa! He has got the be the shortest wrestler ever! And he is overselling soooo badly, its fun! He is like 2 feet shorter than Andre, can we have a page for him here?!? :-)
I would have never believed that Andre the Giant actually performed a tombstone piledriver if I had not witnessed it peronsally in this video! thanks for that!
It is quite hard to judge his height, since all the other guys are rather short
omar g said on 29/Jan/09
i bought that book last week when i was in washington d.c. its not available in the west coast at all.but big show you are right about the book.ive just finished readind the bret hart book and it was the best book ive ever read,probably because it was not wwe published,but the andre book really dissapointed me.it does have nothing but play by play of his matched and a few comments from past superstars and co workers.but some of the pictures in the book are cool.
i bought that book last week when i was in washington d.c. its not available in the west coast at all.but big show you are right about the book.ive just finished readind the bret hart book and it was the best book ive ever read,probably because it was not wwe published,but the andre book really dissapointed me.it does have nothing but play by play of his matched and a few comments from past superstars and co workers.but some of the pictures in the book are cool.
Paul said on 29/Jan/09
Lawrence has it about right. Haystacks was 6'9 or so in the 1970's. There is WOS footage on Youtube where he is paired in a tag team with Ian Muir and he looks 6'9 there. By the mid 1980's he looked about 6'8.5 ...4in on Roach about 3.5in or so on John Quinn... and 6'8 or just under another 10 years after that.
Lawrence has it about right. Haystacks was 6'9 or so in the 1970's. There is WOS footage on Youtube where he is paired in a tag team with Ian Muir and he looks 6'9 there. By the mid 1980's he looked about 6'8.5 ...4in on Roach about 3.5in or so on John Quinn... and 6'8 or just under another 10 years after that.
SayHeyKid said on 29/Jan/09
Big Show: your concerns about the new book regarding Andre are confirmed. It offers very little biographical or otherwise interesting anecdotal information. It is essentially a collection of summaries, quotes and recaps surrounding several of Andre's matches, almost all in the 1980s and leading up to his death. A WWE "promotion" all the way.
Big Show: your concerns about the new book regarding Andre are confirmed. It offers very little biographical or otherwise interesting anecdotal information. It is essentially a collection of summaries, quotes and recaps surrounding several of Andre's matches, almost all in the 1980s and leading up to his death. A WWE "promotion" all the way.
Gretz said on 29/Jan/09
I know this has been posted before,but I think it shows Andre at 7'0" and Hogan at 6'6" or both of them very close to it.They dwarf McMahon here, (Click Here)note:box not included for Andre.
I know this has been posted before,but I think it shows Andre at 7'0" and Hogan at 6'6" or both of them very close to it.They dwarf McMahon here, (Click Here)note:box not included for Andre.
willy79 said on 28/Jan/09
Ok, I've seen the matches of Andre and Ladd and it shows at least 3 inches between the two, however if andre could have shrunk perhaps Ladd also did since he was older. So if Andre was at the time 6'11, than ladd could have been 6'8 at this point. I am a believer that a peak Andre was over 7'0 but I agree with Big Show on this, matches can't tell much of anything w/o staredowns.Click Here I think this is a pretty good video.
Ok, I've seen the matches of Andre and Ladd and it shows at least 3 inches between the two, however if andre could have shrunk perhaps Ladd also did since he was older. So if Andre was at the time 6'11, than ladd could have been 6'8 at this point. I am a believer that a peak Andre was over 7'0 but I agree with Big Show on this, matches can't tell much of anything w/o staredowns.Click Here I think this is a pretty good video.
Gretz said on 28/Jan/09
Big Show,I agree that in ring pics and video are very unreliable for determining heights.I simply meant that looking at the tape Andre clearly looks taller than Ladd to me.In the past some people have suggested that there was an inch or less difference in height between Andre and Ladd.And I think the tape at least shows that Andre is more than an inch taller than Ladd.I would estimate he`s 3 inches taller than Ladd,but would never use in ring footage as evidence as proof of that.The frustrating thing about it is that Andre and Ladd seem to go out of their way to make sure you can`t directly compare their heights.I just paused it at one of the few points that they were close together,I don`t think we will ever see footage of a direct staredown between these two.
Big Show,I agree that in ring pics and video are very unreliable for determining heights.I simply meant that looking at the tape Andre clearly looks taller than Ladd to me.In the past some people have suggested that there was an inch or less difference in height between Andre and Ladd.And I think the tape at least shows that Andre is more than an inch taller than Ladd.I would estimate he`s 3 inches taller than Ladd,but would never use in ring footage as evidence as proof of that.The frustrating thing about it is that Andre and Ladd seem to go out of their way to make sure you can`t directly compare their heights.I just paused it at one of the few points that they were close together,I don`t think we will ever see footage of a direct staredown between these two.
Chaz said on 28/Jan/09
Andrew,you are right about the News Of the world article,she acutaly says he was 6'7.5''which at the time i think that the paper had made a mistake, because he was allways billed as 6'11'',but after seeing him live he did not look no more then 6'8''next to 100% 6'4.5''Pat Roach,lawrence is right about the weight,Haystacks was weighed at 46st,about 650lbs,and i think Slaney who was a discos thrower and strongman was 6'7''in he's shoes,so Haystacks would look 2'' taller'i think Haystacks at he's peack was 6'8.5'' morning and 6'7.5''evening,avarage a weak 6,8''.
Andrew,you are right about the News Of the world article,she acutaly says he was 6'7.5''which at the time i think that the paper had made a mistake, because he was allways billed as 6'11'',but after seeing him live he did not look no more then 6'8''next to 100% 6'4.5''Pat Roach,lawrence is right about the weight,Haystacks was weighed at 46st,about 650lbs,and i think Slaney who was a discos thrower and strongman was 6'7''in he's shoes,so Haystacks would look 2'' taller'i think Haystacks at he's peack was 6'8.5'' morning and 6'7.5''evening,avarage a weak 6,8''.
Big Show said on 28/Jan/09
omar g says on 27/Jan/09
i bought a new book on andre the giant and it has some good pictures of him that ive never seen before.there are pictures where he lookes a good 7'0 and others were he is struggling with 6'10.there is a picture of him and wepner,andre lookes about 2 inches taller if that.there is other pictures i will try to post
Are you talking about that book that currently has been released by the WWE? That book has been postponed a number of times and I was looking forward for this book up until I've read some reviews about it. Apparently this book gives little insight in Andre's life and is more or less a play-by-play commentary of some of his matches.
I will still buy it some day, but my enthousiasm has dropped after reading those reviews (which were mostly all negative).
omar g says on 27/Jan/09
i bought a new book on andre the giant and it has some good pictures of him that ive never seen before.there are pictures where he lookes a good 7'0 and others were he is struggling with 6'10.there is a picture of him and wepner,andre lookes about 2 inches taller if that.there is other pictures i will try to post
Are you talking about that book that currently has been released by the WWE? That book has been postponed a number of times and I was looking forward for this book up until I've read some reviews about it. Apparently this book gives little insight in Andre's life and is more or less a play-by-play commentary of some of his matches.
I will still buy it some day, but my enthousiasm has dropped after reading those reviews (which were mostly all negative).
Andrew said on 27/Jan/09
Lawrence his wife (Rita) isn't short but compared to a guy standing 6'7 she would be, I can't remember the exact article as was many years ago but it did say 6'7.
Lawrence his wife (Rita) isn't short but compared to a guy standing 6'7 she would be, I can't remember the exact article as was many years ago but it did say 6'7.
omar g said on 27/Jan/09
i bought a new book on andre the giant and it has some good pictures of him that ive never seen before.there are pictures where he lookes a good 7'0 and others were he is struggling with 6'10.there is a picture of him and wepner,andre lookes about 2 inches taller if that.there is other pictures i will try to post
i bought a new book on andre the giant and it has some good pictures of him that ive never seen before.there are pictures where he lookes a good 7'0 and others were he is struggling with 6'10.there is a picture of him and wepner,andre lookes about 2 inches taller if that.there is other pictures i will try to post
Lawrence said on 26/Jan/09
Haystacks wife,was not short Rita is 5,4.5''that was the avarage height for a woman in the UK,it was weight differential,they were in the GBR for she was only 7st and he was 46st8lbs,At he's heveyist, but he clamed at one time to be 50st about 700lbs,and I have seen him with my own eyes,in about 1980 standing next to 6'7''Richard Slaney,look him up if you do not know who he is,and Haystacsks was at least 2''taller,he may have beeb 6'7.5''in 1996,but he was at the very least 6'9''has a young man.
Haystacks wife,was not short Rita is 5,4.5''that was the avarage height for a woman in the UK,it was weight differential,they were in the GBR for she was only 7st and he was 46st8lbs,At he's heveyist, but he clamed at one time to be 50st about 700lbs,and I have seen him with my own eyes,in about 1980 standing next to 6'7''Richard Slaney,look him up if you do not know who he is,and Haystacsks was at least 2''taller,he may have beeb 6'7.5''in 1996,but he was at the very least 6'9''has a young man.
Big Show said on 26/Jan/09
Gretz says on 25/Jan/09
Here is a video of Andre vs. Ernie Ladd from what looks like the late 70`s (Click Here).The guy who posted it says Andre appears 3 inches taller than Ladd,and if you pause it at 2:57 that looks about right.
Click Here
Gretz says on 25/Jan/09
If you pause this video at 3:04 (Click Here)there is another comparison of Andre and Ladd.However,Andre is closer to the camera.Still,its easy to see that Andre is clearly taller than Ladd.There are also 2 interviews of Ladd next to Vince Mcmahon,and if Vince is 6'1.5"(as per Rob)than Ladd could be as tall as 6'9".
Click Here
If you want to judge someone's height from wrestling matches, the one and ONLY way to do that is if the match has (some kind of) a staredown in it, where both wrestlers are face to face, toe to toe. That's the only way to go at because both wrestlers are at equal distance from the camera and most of times have a similar posture as well.
All other ways to try and judge a wrestler's height during a match are useless. Camera angles and postures can have a large effect on height. If one wrestler stands closer to the camera he can appear much taller than he is. I can cap pics of matches where Hogan can look as tall or even taller than Andre just because of the camera advantage he has.
There's no doubt in my mind that Andre is several inches taller than Ernie Ladd, though I've never seen any good comparison pics of the two. The matches that I've seen of the two so far simply don't have any good comparison moments. But if I look at the people both wrestlers stood next to I'd say Andre would be a couple of inches taller.
Gretz says on 25/Jan/09
Here is a video of Andre vs. Ernie Ladd from what looks like the late 70`s (Click Here).The guy who posted it says Andre appears 3 inches taller than Ladd,and if you pause it at 2:57 that looks about right.
Click Here
Gretz says on 25/Jan/09
If you pause this video at 3:04 (Click Here)there is another comparison of Andre and Ladd.However,Andre is closer to the camera.Still,its easy to see that Andre is clearly taller than Ladd.There are also 2 interviews of Ladd next to Vince Mcmahon,and if Vince is 6'1.5"(as per Rob)than Ladd could be as tall as 6'9".
Click Here
If you want to judge someone's height from wrestling matches, the one and ONLY way to do that is if the match has (some kind of) a staredown in it, where both wrestlers are face to face, toe to toe. That's the only way to go at because both wrestlers are at equal distance from the camera and most of times have a similar posture as well.
All other ways to try and judge a wrestler's height during a match are useless. Camera angles and postures can have a large effect on height. If one wrestler stands closer to the camera he can appear much taller than he is. I can cap pics of matches where Hogan can look as tall or even taller than Andre just because of the camera advantage he has.
There's no doubt in my mind that Andre is several inches taller than Ernie Ladd, though I've never seen any good comparison pics of the two. The matches that I've seen of the two so far simply don't have any good comparison moments. But if I look at the people both wrestlers stood next to I'd say Andre would be a couple of inches taller.
Ghost said on 26/Jan/09
Andrew says on 25/Jan/09
To offer an insight into Haystacks/Ruane's true height rather than billed he appeared in a Sunday newspaper magazine (I believe NOTW) in an article focussing on large height differentials between couples. His wife was short but billed him as 6ft 7. Seen as it was illustrating big differences this will have been pretty much bang on. I can't remember when published but I'm sure someone would be able to investigate and confirm I would suspect it was some time ago seen as he's been dead some years.
6'7 is very probable for Haystacks as he rarely, if ever, looked taller.
Andrew says on 25/Jan/09
To offer an insight into Haystacks/Ruane's true height rather than billed he appeared in a Sunday newspaper magazine (I believe NOTW) in an article focussing on large height differentials between couples. His wife was short but billed him as 6ft 7. Seen as it was illustrating big differences this will have been pretty much bang on. I can't remember when published but I'm sure someone would be able to investigate and confirm I would suspect it was some time ago seen as he's been dead some years.
6'7 is very probable for Haystacks as he rarely, if ever, looked taller.
Andrew said on 25/Jan/09
To offer an insight into Haystacks/Ruane's true height rather than billed he appeared in a Sunday newspaper magazine (I believe NOTW) in an article focussing on large height differentials between couples. His wife was short but billed him as 6ft 7. Seen as it was illustrating big differences this will have been pretty much bang on. I can't remember when published but I'm sure someone would be able to investigate and confirm I would suspect it was some time ago seen as he's been dead some years.
To offer an insight into Haystacks/Ruane's true height rather than billed he appeared in a Sunday newspaper magazine (I believe NOTW) in an article focussing on large height differentials between couples. His wife was short but billed him as 6ft 7. Seen as it was illustrating big differences this will have been pretty much bang on. I can't remember when published but I'm sure someone would be able to investigate and confirm I would suspect it was some time ago seen as he's been dead some years.
Gretz said on 25/Jan/09
If you pause this video at 3:04 (Click Here)there is another comparison of Andre and Ladd.However,Andre is closer to the camera.Still,its easy to see that Andre is clearly taller than Ladd.There are also 2 interviews of Ladd next to Vince Mcmahon,and if Vince is 6'1.5"(as per Rob)than Ladd could be as tall as 6'9".
If you pause this video at 3:04 (Click Here)there is another comparison of Andre and Ladd.However,Andre is closer to the camera.Still,its easy to see that Andre is clearly taller than Ladd.There are also 2 interviews of Ladd next to Vince Mcmahon,and if Vince is 6'1.5"(as per Rob)than Ladd could be as tall as 6'9".
Gretz said on 25/Jan/09
Here is a video of Andre vs. Ernie Ladd from what looks like the late 70`s (Click Here).The guy who posted it says Andre appears 3 inches taller than Ladd,and if you pause it at 2:57 that looks about right.
Here is a video of Andre vs. Ernie Ladd from what looks like the late 70`s (Click Here).The guy who posted it says Andre appears 3 inches taller than Ladd,and if you pause it at 2:57 that looks about right.
Heights are barefeet estimates, derived from quotations, official websites, agency resumes, in person encounters with actors at conventions and pictures/films.
Other vital statistics like weight or shoe size measurements have been sourced from newspapers, books, resumes or social media.
Celebrity Fan Photos and Agency Pictures of stars are © to their respective owners.