Add a Comment7423 comments
Average Guess (762 Votes)
Peak: 7ft 0.06in (213.5cm)
Current: 6ft 10.39in (209.3cm)
Peak: 7ft 0.06in (213.5cm)
Current: 6ft 10.39in (209.3cm)
mike m said on 8/Jun/07
6,7" get real ,big show is way over that.
6,7" get real ,big show is way over that.
Jason said on 7/Jun/07
Soccer players make the most insane money of the lot. I think some are on $200K a week?
Soccer players make the most insane money of the lot. I think some are on $200K a week?
Jason said on 7/Jun/07
Arjun says on 7/Jun/07
''Delux must have just been kidding around if he said 6'5" for Big Show. IIRC, he thought Show was only an inch or so taller than himself, and he (Delux) claimed to be 6'8", so 6'9".
Also, one other guy on the Shaq page claimed to be 6'9" and said Shaq was barely 6'10" as he was barely taller than him, both in flip-flops.
But I can buy Shaq at 6'11.5" barefoot though, not less than that.''
I would say 7'0'' for Shaq. 6'10''? Doubt it, but I wouldn't rule it out completely as you just never know. Commentators have mentioned how Shaq has shrunk, but I dunno about that...
Arjun says on 7/Jun/07
''Delux must have just been kidding around if he said 6'5" for Big Show. IIRC, he thought Show was only an inch or so taller than himself, and he (Delux) claimed to be 6'8", so 6'9".
Also, one other guy on the Shaq page claimed to be 6'9" and said Shaq was barely 6'10" as he was barely taller than him, both in flip-flops.
But I can buy Shaq at 6'11.5" barefoot though, not less than that.''
I would say 7'0'' for Shaq. 6'10''? Doubt it, but I wouldn't rule it out completely as you just never know. Commentators have mentioned how Shaq has shrunk, but I dunno about that...
Jason said on 7/Jun/07
Alex says on 7/Jun/07
''There was someone else who said his brother took picture with Big Show and they were around the same height and his brother was 6'6 but never linked any pictures obviously because it was probably made up.
I remember Delux, he was like the other poster Will who claimed 6'6 for Big Show and 6'2 for UT, but who knows those guys could have been serious and just terrible at estimating height.
Jason, yea plenty of people will state difference heights for themselves. Sometimes its morning height, sometimes midday, or night but rounding up or down or even with shoes on. Do you ever round up to 6'4 since you're 6'3.5. You're probably at least 6'4 in the morning right and go down to 6'3 flat by night I am guessing?''
6'4'' when I first wake, 6'3 1/2'' is my ''lowest height''. I only ever lose a half inch.
Alex says on 7/Jun/07
''There was someone else who said his brother took picture with Big Show and they were around the same height and his brother was 6'6 but never linked any pictures obviously because it was probably made up.
I remember Delux, he was like the other poster Will who claimed 6'6 for Big Show and 6'2 for UT, but who knows those guys could have been serious and just terrible at estimating height.
Jason, yea plenty of people will state difference heights for themselves. Sometimes its morning height, sometimes midday, or night but rounding up or down or even with shoes on. Do you ever round up to 6'4 since you're 6'3.5. You're probably at least 6'4 in the morning right and go down to 6'3 flat by night I am guessing?''
6'4'' when I first wake, 6'3 1/2'' is my ''lowest height''. I only ever lose a half inch.
Jason said on 7/Jun/07
Click Here
A guy who writes for a wrestling site (whatever 00's Smackdown Spoilers is) said Big Show is no way 7'0'', more like 6'6'' or 6'7''. Whatever height he is, he can sure appear shorter...
Click Here
A guy who writes for a wrestling site (whatever 00's Smackdown Spoilers is) said Big Show is no way 7'0'', more like 6'6'' or 6'7''. Whatever height he is, he can sure appear shorter...
topdweeb26 said on 7/Jun/07
Arjun: obviously he is full of crap, otherwise that would mean Vegas is lying to use about his 6' 4 friend who got completely towered by the Big Show.
Arjun: obviously he is full of crap, otherwise that would mean Vegas is lying to use about his 6' 4 friend who got completely towered by the Big Show.
Arjun said on 7/Jun/07
Noah Steere claimed that Show was 6'8"ish, 6'9" absolute max. Anyone got any pics of these two?
Noah Steere claimed that Show was 6'8"ish, 6'9" absolute max. Anyone got any pics of these two?
topdweeb26 said on 7/Jun/07
Big Show: I agree that athletes (and entertainers in general) are overpaid. But, then again, it's the fans of the sports that make this so. For example, if you don't want boxers to get paid so much, simply stop watching them, then they won't draw the large crowds and high PPV buys, and that means they can't be paid as much. So it's really dependent on their fans.
As for wrestlers being paid nickels and dimes compared to other pro sports, Jason is absolutely right. I mean, last year Royce Gracie fought Matt Hughes at UFC 60. Royce's pay for that one fight was $400,000 and Matt's was $150,000, and that's for one fight. The majority of wrestlers are lucky if that even see that much money (especially the $400k) in a year, let alone for one match. And of course, MMA don't get paid jack compare to boxers who get paid millions for a single fight. I remember once Ken Griffy Jr. signed a 4 year contract with the Mariners when he played for them that was something like $35 million (for all four years). So, yeah, wrestlers don't get anything. Ever notice how more than any other pro-athletes, wrestlers are always trying to get TV shots and into movies? I think they do it because they are trying to make more money.
I hear what you're saying about athletes being over paid, but I don't think that will change unless people change. Like if you don't think a certain pop star should get paid so much, some buying his or her albums. Simple as that.
Big Show: I agree that athletes (and entertainers in general) are overpaid. But, then again, it's the fans of the sports that make this so. For example, if you don't want boxers to get paid so much, simply stop watching them, then they won't draw the large crowds and high PPV buys, and that means they can't be paid as much. So it's really dependent on their fans.
As for wrestlers being paid nickels and dimes compared to other pro sports, Jason is absolutely right. I mean, last year Royce Gracie fought Matt Hughes at UFC 60. Royce's pay for that one fight was $400,000 and Matt's was $150,000, and that's for one fight. The majority of wrestlers are lucky if that even see that much money (especially the $400k) in a year, let alone for one match. And of course, MMA don't get paid jack compare to boxers who get paid millions for a single fight. I remember once Ken Griffy Jr. signed a 4 year contract with the Mariners when he played for them that was something like $35 million (for all four years). So, yeah, wrestlers don't get anything. Ever notice how more than any other pro-athletes, wrestlers are always trying to get TV shots and into movies? I think they do it because they are trying to make more money.
I hear what you're saying about athletes being over paid, but I don't think that will change unless people change. Like if you don't think a certain pop star should get paid so much, some buying his or her albums. Simple as that.
Big Show said on 7/Jun/07
The guys who claim to be supertall and then say a certain celebrity is barely taller/shorter than him have to back it up with pics if they want to convince me. A 6'7 bodybuilder (I believe his name was Noah Steere or something) also claimed Big Show was barely taller than him. A 7'1.5 poster on a German wrestling board claimed Big Show was only marginally shorter than him. 6'8 Ben Davidson claimed he was taller than 6'9 Ernie Ladd. Neither of those guys can back their claims up with pics, so I'm taking their estimates with a grain of salt.
A guy on a wrestling board once claimed he was 7'4 and that Dalip Singh was 4 inches taller than him. Yeah right!
Jason says on 7/Jun/07
topdweeb26 says on 28/May/07
''Jason: yeah it does do a number on the body, and for what? I don't have a problem entering a competition and not being the victor. But I do mind if I have absolutely no control over whether I win or lose, other than backstage politics.''
Exactly. For precious little monetary reward for most guys who wrestle professionally. Even the big time's a nickel and dime business compared to pro sports, thanks to people like McMahon and Ted Turner.
The amounts that some pro-sport athletes sometimes get is downright ridiculous. No person in the business world makes what they make in year (I'm talking salaries, so forget about the huge bonusses that general directors get). Some of them make more money in a month than what most of us make in a lifetime. I'm not much into American sports, but here in Holland some athletes get payed a truckload of money and still complain. They should try working in a business environment. Most soccer players (like David Beckham) have admitted that they don't have a busy workschedule.
A few years back there was a huge discussion going on in my country about a big Supermarket branch who hired a foreign General Manager. The supermarket branch was not doing well (lots of people lost their jobs) yet he got payed 10 million a year to save the company. People thought it outrageous that someone gets such a huge sum of money. The fact that the guy got paid 10 million was not the direct reason that most people got fired there (they would've been fired either way), but the guy did save the company and made it profitable again.
In a sports programm one person commented on the 10 million dollar salary by saying that their are 5 people in the national soccer-league who earn that kind of money as well. What do you think would be more stressful: saving an entire company from bankruptcy or playing soccer?
If you earn 250,000$ a year I wouldn't say you'd have any reason to complain. And the main eventers in the WWE earn more than a million a year (I believe Lesnar earned about 2.5 million a year in the WWE).
The guys who claim to be supertall and then say a certain celebrity is barely taller/shorter than him have to back it up with pics if they want to convince me. A 6'7 bodybuilder (I believe his name was Noah Steere or something) also claimed Big Show was barely taller than him. A 7'1.5 poster on a German wrestling board claimed Big Show was only marginally shorter than him. 6'8 Ben Davidson claimed he was taller than 6'9 Ernie Ladd. Neither of those guys can back their claims up with pics, so I'm taking their estimates with a grain of salt.
A guy on a wrestling board once claimed he was 7'4 and that Dalip Singh was 4 inches taller than him. Yeah right!
Jason says on 7/Jun/07
topdweeb26 says on 28/May/07
''Jason: yeah it does do a number on the body, and for what? I don't have a problem entering a competition and not being the victor. But I do mind if I have absolutely no control over whether I win or lose, other than backstage politics.''
Exactly. For precious little monetary reward for most guys who wrestle professionally. Even the big time's a nickel and dime business compared to pro sports, thanks to people like McMahon and Ted Turner.
The amounts that some pro-sport athletes sometimes get is downright ridiculous. No person in the business world makes what they make in year (I'm talking salaries, so forget about the huge bonusses that general directors get). Some of them make more money in a month than what most of us make in a lifetime. I'm not much into American sports, but here in Holland some athletes get payed a truckload of money and still complain. They should try working in a business environment. Most soccer players (like David Beckham) have admitted that they don't have a busy workschedule.
A few years back there was a huge discussion going on in my country about a big Supermarket branch who hired a foreign General Manager. The supermarket branch was not doing well (lots of people lost their jobs) yet he got payed 10 million a year to save the company. People thought it outrageous that someone gets such a huge sum of money. The fact that the guy got paid 10 million was not the direct reason that most people got fired there (they would've been fired either way), but the guy did save the company and made it profitable again.
In a sports programm one person commented on the 10 million dollar salary by saying that their are 5 people in the national soccer-league who earn that kind of money as well. What do you think would be more stressful: saving an entire company from bankruptcy or playing soccer?
If you earn 250,000$ a year I wouldn't say you'd have any reason to complain. And the main eventers in the WWE earn more than a million a year (I believe Lesnar earned about 2.5 million a year in the WWE).
mike m said on 7/Jun/07
frazier looks to have 5'8" mean gene by 12 inches imo.i,d give frazier 6'8".the giant looks easily 5 inches taller.
frazier looks to have 5'8" mean gene by 12 inches imo.i,d give frazier 6'8".the giant looks easily 5 inches taller.
Arjun said on 7/Jun/07
Delux must have just been kidding around if he said 6'5" for Big Show. IIRC, he thought Show was only an inch or so taller than himself, and he (Delux) claimed to be 6'8", so 6'9".
Also, one other guy on the Shaq page claimed to be 6'9" and said Shaq was barely 6'10" as he was barely taller than him, both in flip-flops.
But I can buy Shaq at 6'11.5" barefoot though, not less than that.
Delux must have just been kidding around if he said 6'5" for Big Show. IIRC, he thought Show was only an inch or so taller than himself, and he (Delux) claimed to be 6'8", so 6'9".
Also, one other guy on the Shaq page claimed to be 6'9" and said Shaq was barely 6'10" as he was barely taller than him, both in flip-flops.
But I can buy Shaq at 6'11.5" barefoot though, not less than that.
Alex said on 7/Jun/07
There was someone else who said his brother took picture with Big Show and they were around the same height and his brother was 6'6 but never linked any pictures obviously because it was probably made up.
I remember Delux, he was like the other poster Will who claimed 6'6 for Big Show and 6'2 for UT, but who knows those guys could have been serious and just terrible at estimating height.
Jason, yea plenty of people will state difference heights for themselves. Sometimes its morning height, sometimes midday, or night but rounding up or down or even with shoes on. Do you ever round up to 6'4 since you're 6'3.5. You're probably at least 6'4 in the morning right and go down to 6'3 flat by night I am guessing?
There was someone else who said his brother took picture with Big Show and they were around the same height and his brother was 6'6 but never linked any pictures obviously because it was probably made up.
I remember Delux, he was like the other poster Will who claimed 6'6 for Big Show and 6'2 for UT, but who knows those guys could have been serious and just terrible at estimating height.
Jason, yea plenty of people will state difference heights for themselves. Sometimes its morning height, sometimes midday, or night but rounding up or down or even with shoes on. Do you ever round up to 6'4 since you're 6'3.5. You're probably at least 6'4 in the morning right and go down to 6'3 flat by night I am guessing?
Jason said on 7/Jun/07
topdweeb26 says on 28/May/07
''Jason: yeah it does do a number on the body, and for what? I don't have a problem entering a competition and not being the victor. But I do mind if I have absolutely no control over whether I win or lose, other than backstage politics.''
Exactly. For precious little monetary reward for most guys who wrestle professionally. Even the big time's a nickel and dime business compared to pro sports, thanks to people like McMahon and Ted Turner.
topdweeb26 says on 28/May/07
''Jason: yeah it does do a number on the body, and for what? I don't have a problem entering a competition and not being the victor. But I do mind if I have absolutely no control over whether I win or lose, other than backstage politics.''
Exactly. For precious little monetary reward for most guys who wrestle professionally. Even the big time's a nickel and dime business compared to pro sports, thanks to people like McMahon and Ted Turner.
Big Show said on 7/Jun/07
I can't remember what they billed Angle at on TV, but on the website they billed him as 6'2. I remember that a wrestling columnist on Lordsofpain once called him the shortest 6'2 person he ever saw :)
Rodman once claimed on Jay Leno that Big Show was 7'2 and he was 6'6, but this looks like someone who likes to downplay his own height. If he's 6'6 that would mean he's only 2 inches taller than Hogan was (and there were more than 2 inches between them) and only 8 inches taller than Cindy Crawford (while he was a full head taller than her).
I believe it was Delux who claimed Big Show was 6'5 and Undertaker 6'1. But I think he only did it to provoke us. No serious person would make such claims. If Big Show is only 6'5 that would make Rey Mysterio well below 5 feet tall.
topdweeb26 says on 6/Jun/07
What do you mean most K-1 fights are unwatchable?
Some of these fight are just unwatchable, meaning they're boring as hell. I've seen numerous fights of Akebono and it's painful to see a former grand champion like Akebono stoop to such a level. He must get a fat paycheck for every fight, cause he's making a complete jacka$$ of himself in the ring. He's way to slow, has no punching skills or coordination (at least not in punching someone) and no talent in kickboxing or martial arts. He's just hitting in the dark there hoping that one of his punches will hit the other guy. I'm not sure if it was K1 or MMA but it had nothing to do with both.
There are probably some good K1-fighters, but some of them can't fight a dime and are only there for commercial reasons (Akebono naturally attracks media attention and therefore also people). It's like watching Mark Henry wrestling The Great Khali.
I can't remember what they billed Angle at on TV, but on the website they billed him as 6'2. I remember that a wrestling columnist on Lordsofpain once called him the shortest 6'2 person he ever saw :)
Rodman once claimed on Jay Leno that Big Show was 7'2 and he was 6'6, but this looks like someone who likes to downplay his own height. If he's 6'6 that would mean he's only 2 inches taller than Hogan was (and there were more than 2 inches between them) and only 8 inches taller than Cindy Crawford (while he was a full head taller than her).
I believe it was Delux who claimed Big Show was 6'5 and Undertaker 6'1. But I think he only did it to provoke us. No serious person would make such claims. If Big Show is only 6'5 that would make Rey Mysterio well below 5 feet tall.
topdweeb26 says on 6/Jun/07
What do you mean most K-1 fights are unwatchable?
Some of these fight are just unwatchable, meaning they're boring as hell. I've seen numerous fights of Akebono and it's painful to see a former grand champion like Akebono stoop to such a level. He must get a fat paycheck for every fight, cause he's making a complete jacka$$ of himself in the ring. He's way to slow, has no punching skills or coordination (at least not in punching someone) and no talent in kickboxing or martial arts. He's just hitting in the dark there hoping that one of his punches will hit the other guy. I'm not sure if it was K1 or MMA but it had nothing to do with both.
There are probably some good K1-fighters, but some of them can't fight a dime and are only there for commercial reasons (Akebono naturally attracks media attention and therefore also people). It's like watching Mark Henry wrestling The Great Khali.
Jason said on 7/Jun/07
When the discrepancies in the heights they claim is an inch or less, it's likely just down to being measured at different times of the day/rounding up-down.
When the discrepancies in the heights they claim is an inch or less, it's likely just down to being measured at different times of the day/rounding up-down.
JT said on 7/Jun/07
Finally found a few videos where Big Show is briefly standing side by side with 5
Finally found a few videos where Big Show is briefly standing side by side with 5
wolverinejoe80 said on 6/Jun/07
i think shaq is 214cm. no more no less. there are too many pictures on shaq, and i just can't believe he is 'under' 7ft. if not 7ft 1/2 he is at least a legit 7ft even IMO.
i think shaq is 214cm. no more no less. there are too many pictures on shaq, and i just can't believe he is 'under' 7ft. if not 7ft 1/2 he is at least a legit 7ft even IMO.
Alex said on 6/Jun/07
Topdweeb, Angle billed at 6'2 was rediculous but never on TV did they say it at all. Only was listed 6'2 on the site but on TV a lot they would say 6'0 though which I did buy into for a few years at least. I didn't even ask him his height as I pretty much knew it once he stood up.
Now if I was a wrestler they'd list me at 6'2-6'3 I believe.
Topdweeb, Angle billed at 6'2 was rediculous but never on TV did they say it at all. Only was listed 6'2 on the site but on TV a lot they would say 6'0 though which I did buy into for a few years at least. I didn't even ask him his height as I pretty much knew it once he stood up.
Now if I was a wrestler they'd list me at 6'2-6'3 I believe.
Vegas said on 6/Jun/07
Shaq has gone on record and stated he was 6'11.5" legit.
Yes and people have claimed dennis rodman said he was 6'6 on american tv but yet he said twice on british tv he was 6'7. Charles Barkley for a long time said he was just 6'4.75" and then on tv in january he comes out and says he REAL height is 6'5.5". I love how all these guys take us for a ride.
Shaq has gone on record and stated he was 6'11.5" legit.
Yes and people have claimed dennis rodman said he was 6'6 on american tv but yet he said twice on british tv he was 6'7. Charles Barkley for a long time said he was just 6'4.75" and then on tv in january he comes out and says he REAL height is 6'5.5". I love how all these guys take us for a ride.
topdweeb26 said on 6/Jun/07
Big Show: They did have a better fighter for him to fight, Hong Man Choi. But Choi didn't pass the California medical clearance because of his acromegaly. And, they probably couldn't find anyone better than Kim because most higher profile fighters won't take a fight on such short notice. But Kim had nothing to lose, only gains if he beat Brock Lesnar. So considering how much it would have helped him if he won, he would have been a fool not to accept, and if he lost like he did, then no big deal because he loses all the time. What do you mean most K-1 fights are unwatchable?
Alex: yeah, it was actaully hard to believe he wasn't kidding around or anything.
Big Show: They did have a better fighter for him to fight, Hong Man Choi. But Choi didn't pass the California medical clearance because of his acromegaly. And, they probably couldn't find anyone better than Kim because most higher profile fighters won't take a fight on such short notice. But Kim had nothing to lose, only gains if he beat Brock Lesnar. So considering how much it would have helped him if he won, he would have been a fool not to accept, and if he lost like he did, then no big deal because he loses all the time. What do you mean most K-1 fights are unwatchable?
Alex: yeah, it was actaully hard to believe he wasn't kidding around or anything.
Gollum said on 6/Jun/07
Wasnt that guy Delux or Jason or something?
Wasnt that guy Delux or Jason or something?
Alex said on 6/Jun/07
Topdweeb, yea Shaq was known as 7'1 and Wight was known as 7'4 so if both were the same height it would easily make Wight not look his billed 7'4 height.
Actually he claimed UT 6'2 and Big Show 6'6 I remember and also he said Kane looked 6'4! I found it funny because it would make guys like Rock, HHH, Orton, Batista under 5'10. That was also the same person who said on Andre's page that Andre's peak height was 6'7!
Topdweeb, yea Shaq was known as 7'1 and Wight was known as 7'4 so if both were the same height it would easily make Wight not look his billed 7'4 height.
Actually he claimed UT 6'2 and Big Show 6'6 I remember and also he said Kane looked 6'4! I found it funny because it would make guys like Rock, HHH, Orton, Batista under 5'10. That was also the same person who said on Andre's page that Andre's peak height was 6'7!
Danimal said on 6/Jun/07
Shaq has gone on record and stated he was 6'11.5" legit on the Howard Stern Show. His 7'1" listing is clearly with his shoes on. I believe that a WCW Big Show (The Giant), would have been taller than Shaq. Today it could go either.
Shaq has gone on record and stated he was 6'11.5" legit on the Howard Stern Show. His 7'1" listing is clearly with his shoes on. I believe that a WCW Big Show (The Giant), would have been taller than Shaq. Today it could go either.
topdweeb26 said on 6/Jun/07
I think there's a good reason Shaq and "The Giant" were never seen together in WCW... it would be pretty stupid to have them at roughly the same height (even the risk of Shaq being 1" taller) if The Giant is supposed to be 7' 4. Even if they were exactly the same height, or even if Wight was, say, 1" taller than Shaq, it would be a dead give away that Wight wasn't 7' 4.
Vegas: lol I remember that guy who claimed Undertaker was only 6' 1. He also said that the Big Show was only 6' 5!
I think there's a good reason Shaq and "The Giant" were never seen together in WCW... it would be pretty stupid to have them at roughly the same height (even the risk of Shaq being 1" taller) if The Giant is supposed to be 7' 4. Even if they were exactly the same height, or even if Wight was, say, 1" taller than Shaq, it would be a dead give away that Wight wasn't 7' 4.
Vegas: lol I remember that guy who claimed Undertaker was only 6' 1. He also said that the Big Show was only 6' 5!
Vegas said on 6/Jun/07
I would say Shaq is roughly 1" taller but we would need both barefoot like the Akebono fight and I bet no-one questioned akebono's 6'8 listing before that match. Now people think he is as short as 6'3-6'4
Jason were you not the person who said Singh would have at least 4" on Show???? Is Dalip really only 6'8 now?? It doesnt really matter anyway if we had a picture or video of show and shaq where Wight was as tall or taller; because then the claims of lift wearing would surface or that the angle favored Wight just like angle favored Triple H with shaq ;)
As much as the Andre/Wilt photo has been run throught the mill on here the fact remains Andre looks as tall as Wilt and wasn't Wilt taller than Shaq back in the day according to some (at least 1.6"). Nash towers Magic, had rodman by 3", was taller than 6'9 listed Miller, only 4" shorter than Kareem and only 1.5-2" shorter than Robinson. Tall wrestlers have more than held their own in photos and videos with tall basketballers imo so far.
Wasnt taker taller than the supposed 6'8 Tim Sylvia in a video??? not bad for a guy who someone on here claimed was just 6'1.
I would say Shaq is roughly 1" taller but we would need both barefoot like the Akebono fight and I bet no-one questioned akebono's 6'8 listing before that match. Now people think he is as short as 6'3-6'4
Jason were you not the person who said Singh would have at least 4" on Show???? Is Dalip really only 6'8 now?? It doesnt really matter anyway if we had a picture or video of show and shaq where Wight was as tall or taller; because then the claims of lift wearing would surface or that the angle favored Wight just like angle favored Triple H with shaq ;)
As much as the Andre/Wilt photo has been run throught the mill on here the fact remains Andre looks as tall as Wilt and wasn't Wilt taller than Shaq back in the day according to some (at least 1.6"). Nash towers Magic, had rodman by 3", was taller than 6'9 listed Miller, only 4" shorter than Kareem and only 1.5-2" shorter than Robinson. Tall wrestlers have more than held their own in photos and videos with tall basketballers imo so far.
Wasnt taker taller than the supposed 6'8 Tim Sylvia in a video??? not bad for a guy who someone on here claimed was just 6'1.
Alex said on 6/Jun/07
I'd love to see Big Show and Shaq together.
I'd love to see Big Show and Shaq together.
Jason said on 6/Jun/07
I think there's a reason there haven't been any Shaq/Big Show pics...
I think there's a reason there haven't been any Shaq/Big Show pics...
Arjun said on 6/Jun/07
Topdweeb: Show does look a bit taller in the comparison, but he has looked shorter than he looks in those WCW pics on many occasions. As of today, Show gives an impression of being a bit shorter than Shaq. But that could be just due to posture .... either way, they are very close in height, within say a couple cm of each other.
Topdweeb: Show does look a bit taller in the comparison, but he has looked shorter than he looks in those WCW pics on many occasions. As of today, Show gives an impression of being a bit shorter than Shaq. But that could be just due to posture .... either way, they are very close in height, within say a couple cm of each other.
Danimal said on 5/Jun/07
LV, the thing is that video of Taker and Big Show is from 1999, which I believe to be Taker still at HIS peak height, along with a Big Show who had not really lost any height yet.
LV, the thing is that video of Taker and Big Show is from 1999, which I believe to be Taker still at HIS peak height, along with a Big Show who had not really lost any height yet.
topdweeb26 said on 5/Jun/07
Alex: I can probably concede for them being the same height, but if you look in the picture, even JT drew the line from the top of Show's head to be taller than Shaq. So I'm guessing JT concurs with me that Show is taller in those pics.
As for Lesnar and Angle, are you speaking about MMA style rules? Here's the general rule, but of course there are exceptions, about size. All things being equal, a bigger stronger person will generally beat a smaller person. So if two people are equal in skill, experience, and one doesn't have an obvious advantage over the other, the bigger stronger person will usually win. In MMA rules, I would go with Lesnar over Angle. Lesnar is a lot younger, he's very big and very strong, and he has been training in MMA for a little bit now. Truthfully, it's too early to tell how good of a fighter Lesnar will be. He ended up having to fight a guy who couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag (and he has the fight record to show for it) and the guy was a replacement fighter who only had a few weeks to get ready to top it off. Kurt Angle on the other hand, does a lot of trash talk. He talks about MMA as if he has an established record and has even made absurd claims, such as him saying he could take Chuck Liddell. I respect Angle as a freestyle wrestler, but as a fighter, so far all I see is he is all talk and no action.
Alex: I can probably concede for them being the same height, but if you look in the picture, even JT drew the line from the top of Show's head to be taller than Shaq. So I'm guessing JT concurs with me that Show is taller in those pics.
As for Lesnar and Angle, are you speaking about MMA style rules? Here's the general rule, but of course there are exceptions, about size. All things being equal, a bigger stronger person will generally beat a smaller person. So if two people are equal in skill, experience, and one doesn't have an obvious advantage over the other, the bigger stronger person will usually win. In MMA rules, I would go with Lesnar over Angle. Lesnar is a lot younger, he's very big and very strong, and he has been training in MMA for a little bit now. Truthfully, it's too early to tell how good of a fighter Lesnar will be. He ended up having to fight a guy who couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag (and he has the fight record to show for it) and the guy was a replacement fighter who only had a few weeks to get ready to top it off. Kurt Angle on the other hand, does a lot of trash talk. He talks about MMA as if he has an established record and has even made absurd claims, such as him saying he could take Chuck Liddell. I respect Angle as a freestyle wrestler, but as a fighter, so far all I see is he is all talk and no action.
mike m said on 5/Jun/07
i,ve seen it listed that giant haystack was 6'11".theres no way this man looked 6'11 in the staredown with the wcw giant,imo he was about 6'8".the giant clearly had this man by 5 inches at least.they must have billed him 3 inches taller than his actual height,sort of how they first stated the giant was 7'4,when we all know he,s only 7 foot.
i,ve seen it listed that giant haystack was 6'11".theres no way this man looked 6'11 in the staredown with the wcw giant,imo he was about 6'8".the giant clearly had this man by 5 inches at least.they must have billed him 3 inches taller than his actual height,sort of how they first stated the giant was 7'4,when we all know he,s only 7 foot.
Alex said on 5/Jun/07
Topdweeb, Lesnar and Angle would be an interesting shoot fight. If he went down on the street I'd go with Lesnar but I think Angle could take him in a ring or some sort though and people assume Lesnar would win since he's stronger and weighs much more but not always true.
Topdweeb, Lesnar and Angle would be an interesting shoot fight. If he went down on the street I'd go with Lesnar but I think Angle could take him in a ring or some sort though and people assume Lesnar would win since he's stronger and weighs much more but not always true.
Alex said on 5/Jun/07
Even though in those pictures, I still couldn't see Big Show taller than Shaq. I think really they're probably the same height.
Even though in those pictures, I still couldn't see Big Show taller than Shaq. I think really they're probably the same height.
topdweeb26 said on 5/Jun/07
LV: I was in the military for several years and only recently got out. Those boots do not give you much height at all, despite how they look. In fact, the pair I wore and still have, don't even give me as much height as some of my street shoes do. Only about 1". And I have seen the Big Show with the Undertaker where he looked easily 4" or more.
Arjun: well, if Show is 7-foot flat, then Shaq looks to be about 6' 11.5. But I could conceivably see them as the same height if perhaps shoe thickness came into play, or perhaps Shaq was slightly slouching or something. But the point is, in the comparision JT showed, Show looks slightly taller. I honestly don't understand the logic of saying Shaq edges him out in height when he is the taller of the two in the comparison.
LV: I was in the military for several years and only recently got out. Those boots do not give you much height at all, despite how they look. In fact, the pair I wore and still have, don't even give me as much height as some of my street shoes do. Only about 1". And I have seen the Big Show with the Undertaker where he looked easily 4" or more.
Arjun: well, if Show is 7-foot flat, then Shaq looks to be about 6' 11.5. But I could conceivably see them as the same height if perhaps shoe thickness came into play, or perhaps Shaq was slightly slouching or something. But the point is, in the comparision JT showed, Show looks slightly taller. I honestly don't understand the logic of saying Shaq edges him out in height when he is the taller of the two in the comparison.
Alex said on 5/Jun/07
Shaq has gotta be 7'0 barefoot while Big Show I don't see under 6'11 barefoot. At the most Shaq would have an inch on Big Show.
Shaq has gotta be 7'0 barefoot while Big Show I don't see under 6'11 barefoot. At the most Shaq would have an inch on Big Show.
LV said on 5/Jun/07
topweed, Big Show wore bigger boots in WCW. They are military-style laced boots with a big heel. He looked every bit of 7'1" in the ring while with WCW. He doesn't look quite as tall in his WWF days. If you don't believe me go to the Undertaker page, there is a video on there with UT barely looking 3" shorter. In the WCW Big Show was at least 3" taller than Nash and we know Nash was taller the UT.
topweed, Big Show wore bigger boots in WCW. They are military-style laced boots with a big heel. He looked every bit of 7'1" in the ring while with WCW. He doesn't look quite as tall in his WWF days. If you don't believe me go to the Undertaker page, there is a video on there with UT barely looking 3" shorter. In the WCW Big Show was at least 3" taller than Nash and we know Nash was taller the UT.
Arjun said on 5/Jun/07
Topdweeb: How tall do you think Shaq is?
Topdweeb: How tall do you think Shaq is?
topdweeb26 said on 4/Jun/07
Arjun: to me it looks like Show is taller than Shaq in JT's comparison, so if anything, I would say that Show edges out Shaq in height. In the WCW days, Show didn't wear thick heals. I am guessing the reason he does today is because he either really did lose some height, or because his posture got progressively worse he might wear them to compensate for that.
Arjun: to me it looks like Show is taller than Shaq in JT's comparison, so if anything, I would say that Show edges out Shaq in height. In the WCW days, Show didn't wear thick heals. I am guessing the reason he does today is because he either really did lose some height, or because his posture got progressively worse he might wear them to compensate for that.
Arjun said on 4/Jun/07
Shaq may just edge out Big Show in terms of height. I would say Show is 6'11" barefoot, Shaq 6'11.5" - 7'0" max barefoot.
Shaq may just edge out Big Show in terms of height. I would say Show is 6'11" barefoot, Shaq 6'11.5" - 7'0" max barefoot.
mike m said on 4/Jun/07
big show today 7,0",khali,7'1",taker 6'8",kane6'8".
big show today 7,0",khali,7'1",taker 6'8",kane6'8".
mike m said on 3/Jun/07
i read an article it stated paul wight was 7'1" 410 1bs when he played for wichita state.
i read an article it stated paul wight was 7'1" 410 1bs when he played for wichita state.
Alex said on 3/Jun/07
Big Show was listed at 6'11 in college, could have easily grew an inch anyway.
Big Show was listed at 6'11 in college, could have easily grew an inch anyway.
Craiger said on 3/Jun/07
nice find vegas, though all of the other articles have big show peeged at 7'1", though nowadays I would say he is 6'11.5"-7'
nice find vegas, though all of the other articles have big show peeged at 7'1", though nowadays I would say he is 6'11.5"-7'
JT said on 3/Jun/07
Great find there Vegas. Big Show was pretty lanky back then and still weighed around 330 lbs. It shows how large his bone structure really is.
I know you
Great find there Vegas. Big Show was pretty lanky back then and still weighed around 330 lbs. It shows how large his bone structure really is.
I know you
topdweeb26 said on 3/Jun/07
Vegas: Cool man, and it even says Paul Wight is 7-foot.
Vegas: Cool man, and it even says Paul Wight is 7-foot.
Vegas said on 3/Jun/07
here is an article i found on paul wight written in 1992 Click Here The writer must have been psychic with the "Andre" reference 3 years too early :D He weighed 330lb back then
here is an article i found on paul wight written in 1992 Click Here The writer must have been psychic with the "Andre" reference 3 years too early :D He weighed 330lb back then
mike m said on 3/Jun/07
imo haystacks was 6'6"maybe 6'7" the most,probably 600 1bs.big show 7'0" 450 1bs in wcw.
imo haystacks was 6'6"maybe 6'7" the most,probably 600 1bs.big show 7'0" 450 1bs in wcw.
wolverinejoe80 said on 3/Jun/07
war brock! even though kim was just another can. i think dana white is writing a check as we speak. :D brock in UFC means tons bandwagon WWE fans! that would be awesome!
war brock! even though kim was just another can. i think dana white is writing a check as we speak. :D brock in UFC means tons bandwagon WWE fans! that would be awesome!
topdweeb26 said on 3/Jun/07
If you guys don't know, Brock Lesnar defeated Min Soo Kim via ground-and-pound. Min Soo Kim had a fight record of 2 wins and 5 losses going into this, so he wasn't a high profile fighter or anything. But hey, it was Lesnar's first fight. And it's a lot more than what Kurt Angle does.. incase you guys don't know what I'm referring to, Kurt Angle talks so much trash that you'd think he had an impressive MMA record, when the truth is, he's got jack. And won't until he actually get the guts to go out there like Lesnar did.
If you guys don't know, Brock Lesnar defeated Min Soo Kim via ground-and-pound. Min Soo Kim had a fight record of 2 wins and 5 losses going into this, so he wasn't a high profile fighter or anything. But hey, it was Lesnar's first fight. And it's a lot more than what Kurt Angle does.. incase you guys don't know what I'm referring to, Kurt Angle talks so much trash that you'd think he had an impressive MMA record, when the truth is, he's got jack. And won't until he actually get the guts to go out there like Lesnar did.
topdweeb26 said on 2/Jun/07
Alex: in those pic's Big Show looks slightly taller than Shaq to me, so if anything, I would say that Big Show is slightly taller than Shaq. In WCW days, Big Show didn't wear as big of heals as he does in WWE (perhaps he wear boots with thicker soles in WWE to make up for his bad posture).
Alex: in those pic's Big Show looks slightly taller than Shaq to me, so if anything, I would say that Big Show is slightly taller than Shaq. In WCW days, Big Show didn't wear as big of heals as he does in WWE (perhaps he wear boots with thicker soles in WWE to make up for his bad posture).
JT said on 2/Jun/07
IMO, Shaq and Big Show would be very close in height barefoot. Maybe Shaq had Topsiders or a similar small-heeled shoe on when in the ring with Hogan.
IMO, Shaq and Big Show would be very close in height barefoot. Maybe Shaq had Topsiders or a similar small-heeled shoe on when in the ring with Hogan.
JT said on 2/Jun/07
IMO, Shaq and Big Show would be very close in height barefoot. Maybe Shaq had Topsiders or a similar small-heeled shoe on when in the ring with Hogan.
IMO, Shaq and Big Show would be very close in height barefoot. Maybe Shaq had Topsiders or a similar small-heeled shoe on when in the ring with Hogan.
Alex said on 2/Jun/07
I do think Big Show and Shaq would be around the same height barefoot. Maybe Shaq would have 1/2 to an inch on Show at most. Also Show's posture isn't good and Shaq you know stands pretty good too.
I do think Big Show and Shaq would be around the same height barefoot. Maybe Shaq would have 1/2 to an inch on Show at most. Also Show's posture isn't good and Shaq you know stands pretty good too.
Anonymous said on 2/Jun/07
JT, I would say Show and Shaq are almost exactly the same height bare foot. It would be cool if we got a pic of those two side by side.
JT, I would say Show and Shaq are almost exactly the same height bare foot. It would be cool if we got a pic of those two side by side.
JT said on 2/Jun/07
I assumed Mean Gene was 5
I assumed Mean Gene was 5
Anonymous said on 31/May/07
imo big show wcw days was probably 7'1" tops,reis from ravens flock did have him by a few inches at least 2 i,d say,so i,m guessing reis was 7'3" max.
imo big show wcw days was probably 7'1" tops,reis from ravens flock did have him by a few inches at least 2 i,d say,so i,m guessing reis was 7'3" max.
topdweeb26 said on 28/May/07
Jason: yeah it does do a number on the body, and for what? I don't have a problem entering a competition and not being the victor. But I do mind if I have absolutely no control over whether I win or lose, other than backstage politics.
Jason: yeah it does do a number on the body, and for what? I don't have a problem entering a competition and not being the victor. But I do mind if I have absolutely no control over whether I win or lose, other than backstage politics.
topdweeb26 said on 28/May/07
wolverinejoe: Oh I know, I really just wanted to see Brock fight anyone really. I remember around 10 years ago now, Royce Gracie was going to fight Mark Kerr, and then Kerr got injured and the fight got called off. And for some reason there was never a reschedule. I remember being really disappointed about that. It happens in MMA I guess.
wolverinejoe: Oh I know, I really just wanted to see Brock fight anyone really. I remember around 10 years ago now, Royce Gracie was going to fight Mark Kerr, and then Kerr got injured and the fight got called off. And for some reason there was never a reschedule. I remember being really disappointed about that. It happens in MMA I guess.
wolverinejoe80 said on 28/May/07
what a let down. i really wanted to see hong man vs. brock. brock was my favorite wrestler and hong man is one of my favorite K1 fighter.
it's not like he has a leukemia or something, it just an acromegaly.
what a let down. i really wanted to see hong man vs. brock. brock was my favorite wrestler and hong man is one of my favorite K1 fighter.
it's not like he has a leukemia or something, it just an acromegaly.
Jason said on 27/May/07
Though I've been a wrestling fan since I was a little kid, I've never really wanted to be a wrestler. Certainly not when I got older and became aware of the number it does on your body.
Though I've been a wrestling fan since I was a little kid, I've never really wanted to be a wrestler. Certainly not when I got older and became aware of the number it does on your body.
Alex said on 26/May/07
What made me not wanna be a wrestler I guess was probably it took a lot more work than I thought it would and when I was much younger I thought it was easy and also had my eyes set on other things as well. By 13 I decided I didn't wanna be one. Not only me but plenty of kids my age or even today who are not even in their teens wanna be wrestlers.
What made me not wanna be a wrestler I guess was probably it took a lot more work than I thought it would and when I was much younger I thought it was easy and also had my eyes set on other things as well. By 13 I decided I didn't wanna be one. Not only me but plenty of kids my age or even today who are not even in their teens wanna be wrestlers.
topdweeb26 said on 26/May/07
Alex: just curious, but what got you out of the interest of pro-wrestling? Did it just kinda phase out of you?
Alex: just curious, but what got you out of the interest of pro-wrestling? Did it just kinda phase out of you?
Alex said on 26/May/07
Danimal, in late 2004 into early 2005 I went from 195-215lbs in a 2 month period or a bit less. I didn't do any cardio, increased my calories and went on NOX2. Then in summer 2005 I actually dropped down to 185lbs, BUT I still kept a good amount of muscle then got back to 195-200lbs where I'm at now.
I'm going to increase my eating, go on a supplement, maybe like NO Explode creatine and do very little cardio but I wanna avoid gaining too much fat thats if I get to 225lbs. I'll see by then. I normally do low reps anyway, 6-10 reps for the most part.
Danimal, in late 2004 into early 2005 I went from 195-215lbs in a 2 month period or a bit less. I didn't do any cardio, increased my calories and went on NOX2. Then in summer 2005 I actually dropped down to 185lbs, BUT I still kept a good amount of muscle then got back to 195-200lbs where I'm at now.
I'm going to increase my eating, go on a supplement, maybe like NO Explode creatine and do very little cardio but I wanna avoid gaining too much fat thats if I get to 225lbs. I'll see by then. I normally do low reps anyway, 6-10 reps for the most part.
Alex said on 25/May/07
Topdweeb, normally in the summer I'm no more than 195lbs tops and closer to 190lbs sometimes too but you know with summer its easier to lean out a bit or maintain and save the weight gaining for winter. I've actually lost a few pounds in the last month or so too because its getter warmer and I started up on cardio again. 225lbs would be nice but the problem with gaining too much is when your pants are too small, thats what will stop you.
Topdweeb, normally in the summer I'm no more than 195lbs tops and closer to 190lbs sometimes too but you know with summer its easier to lean out a bit or maintain and save the weight gaining for winter. I've actually lost a few pounds in the last month or so too because its getter warmer and I started up on cardio again. 225lbs would be nice but the problem with gaining too much is when your pants are too small, thats what will stop you.
Danimal said on 25/May/07
Alex, what are you going to change to gain 25 pounds? Are you going to increase your calorie intake, or just do lower reps/higher weight and cut back on the cardio? If you take a Solid Mass powder that can do the trick.
Well, I am no longer working out (haven't since last September). When I worked out I weighed between 195-205 pounds at 5'9.5"-5'10".
Alex, what are you going to change to gain 25 pounds? Are you going to increase your calorie intake, or just do lower reps/higher weight and cut back on the cardio? If you take a Solid Mass powder that can do the trick.
Well, I am no longer working out (haven't since last September). When I worked out I weighed between 195-205 pounds at 5'9.5"-5'10".
topdweeb26 said on 25/May/07
Alex: to me it sounds like you're at a good size. I agree with you, possibly 225 lbs, but no more than that.
Alex: to me it sounds like you're at a good size. I agree with you, possibly 225 lbs, but no more than that.
Alex said on 25/May/07
Danimal, you're 5'9.5-5'10 you said but whats your weight?
Danimal, you're 5'9.5-5'10 you said but whats your weight?
Alex said on 25/May/07
Danimal, I don't think 200lbs is a lot of my height but its sure not a little. Its more than average though as I'm big at 200lbs though because when I was 200lbs before I joined the gym I was just medium framed and didn't look big. I'm more medium framed than lean though. I'm thinking about getting up to 225lbs this winter, no more than that though. That's a good weight for 6'0-6'1.
Danimal, I don't think 200lbs is a lot of my height but its sure not a little. Its more than average though as I'm big at 200lbs though because when I was 200lbs before I joined the gym I was just medium framed and didn't look big. I'm more medium framed than lean though. I'm thinking about getting up to 225lbs this winter, no more than that though. That's a good weight for 6'0-6'1.
Danimal said on 24/May/07
Alex, 200 pounds isn't very much for a guy who is over 6'0". If I were that height I would be an easy 235-245 pounds. In any case, a lean and muscular 6'0" guy can look good at 200 pounds, but for 6'0" you should add a good 30 pounds to your frame MINIMUM. then again, you are in your early 20's, so maybe you will gain some more size as your grow older (mid-late 20's).
Alex, 200 pounds isn't very much for a guy who is over 6'0". If I were that height I would be an easy 235-245 pounds. In any case, a lean and muscular 6'0" guy can look good at 200 pounds, but for 6'0" you should add a good 30 pounds to your frame MINIMUM. then again, you are in your early 20's, so maybe you will gain some more size as your grow older (mid-late 20's).
Vegas said on 24/May/07
looks like the Choi/lesnar fight won't happen Click Here and i was so waiting for Choi to kick lesnars a**
looks like the Choi/lesnar fight won't happen Click Here and i was so waiting for Choi to kick lesnars a**
wolverinejoe80 said on 24/May/07
Click Here
gracie is 5ft 11. he looks like a giant in that pics
Click Here
-gracie would stand below hongman's shoulder if they stood straight next to each other. akebono had 8 inches on gracie.
hong man choi vs. 6ft mike malone
Click Here
anyway, i can't wait for the fight. it's a very dangerous fight for both fighters. if brock can keep him down, than brock could win. but if they stand? hong man will kill brock.
Click Here
gracie is 5ft 11. he looks like a giant in that pics
Click Here
-gracie would stand below hongman's shoulder if they stood straight next to each other. akebono had 8 inches on gracie.
hong man choi vs. 6ft mike malone
Click Here
anyway, i can't wait for the fight. it's a very dangerous fight for both fighters. if brock can keep him down, than brock could win. but if they stand? hong man will kill brock.
wolverinejoe80 said on 24/May/07
big show,
hong man will have a full 12 inches on brock. i'll bet you my house.
hong man never stands straight. he slouches 99% of the time.
look at hong man and akebono
Click Here
big show,
hong man will have a full 12 inches on brock. i'll bet you my house.
hong man never stands straight. he slouches 99% of the time.
look at hong man and akebono
Click Here
mike m said on 23/May/07
i,ve reviewed some pics of an early wcw big show and i,m starting to think big show may only be 6'11" 7'0" max.khali in the staredown video, at certain camera angles khali looked 2-3 inches taller imo.
i,ve reviewed some pics of an early wcw big show and i,m starting to think big show may only be 6'11" 7'0" max.khali in the staredown video, at certain camera angles khali looked 2-3 inches taller imo.
Alex said on 23/May/07
Actually I'm bigger than quite a few wrestlers weight wise. All the cruiserweights and some guys they claim are heavyweights who are really lightheavy weights. 6'0.5 200lbs with mostly muscle is on the big side. I'm bigger than the average guy walking down the street and I even hold my own pretty well in the gym and bigger than some others who have muscle (not the freakishly big guys) so I'm not a small guy but compared to guys like Batista, HHH, Lesnar, then yea I'm small.
Actually I'm bigger than quite a few wrestlers weight wise. All the cruiserweights and some guys they claim are heavyweights who are really lightheavy weights. 6'0.5 200lbs with mostly muscle is on the big side. I'm bigger than the average guy walking down the street and I even hold my own pretty well in the gym and bigger than some others who have muscle (not the freakishly big guys) so I'm not a small guy but compared to guys like Batista, HHH, Lesnar, then yea I'm small.
Alex said on 23/May/07
A couple people have told me that I should have tried out for WWE and I'm like I'm not interesting. When I was a kid up until 12-13 I wanted to be a wrestler but grew out of the fantasy. They say since I have good size I could be good, but I tell them its not only about how you look, its mostly about your character and how good of a wrestler and performer you are. I have good size but compared to some other wrestlers I'd be on the smaller size though.
A couple people have told me that I should have tried out for WWE and I'm like I'm not interesting. When I was a kid up until 12-13 I wanted to be a wrestler but grew out of the fantasy. They say since I have good size I could be good, but I tell them its not only about how you look, its mostly about your character and how good of a wrestler and performer you are. I have good size but compared to some other wrestlers I'd be on the smaller size though.
Danimal said on 22/May/07
Actually, wrestlers will usually mask an injury, or take a ton of painkillers to suppress the pain, because if they admit to being hurt, they may be off the payroll with a dictator boss like Vince.
Actually, wrestlers will usually mask an injury, or take a ton of painkillers to suppress the pain, because if they admit to being hurt, they may be off the payroll with a dictator boss like Vince.
topdweeb26 said on 22/May/07
Big Show: well, to each their own.
Big Show: well, to each their own.
Big Show said on 22/May/07
topdweeb26 says on 21/May/07
Big Show: you're saying that simply getting injured some how legitimizes pro-wrestling?
No I was merely saying that the injuries that show wrestlers sustain are real. They don't fake their injuries, so I'd like show-wrestlers to get some more respect for what they're doing, instead of saying that it's fake and a lot of them wouldn't make it in a real sport. To some WWE superstars that might be true, but to most this certainly does not. They're all incredible athletes and the top-card wrestlers wrestle like 2 or 3 shows a week and these guys don't have any off-seasons, they wrestle an entire year and have a very hectic travel schedule. Wrestlers who try to make it in a different field of sports might fail, but so do other sportsmen who try to make it in show-Wrestling.
The term
topdweeb26 says on 21/May/07
Big Show: you're saying that simply getting injured some how legitimizes pro-wrestling?
No I was merely saying that the injuries that show wrestlers sustain are real. They don't fake their injuries, so I'd like show-wrestlers to get some more respect for what they're doing, instead of saying that it's fake and a lot of them wouldn't make it in a real sport. To some WWE superstars that might be true, but to most this certainly does not. They're all incredible athletes and the top-card wrestlers wrestle like 2 or 3 shows a week and these guys don't have any off-seasons, they wrestle an entire year and have a very hectic travel schedule. Wrestlers who try to make it in a different field of sports might fail, but so do other sportsmen who try to make it in show-Wrestling.
The term
Alex said on 22/May/07
I think Lesnar is stronger than Hong Man.
I think Lesnar is stronger than Hong Man.
big show fan said on 21/May/07
big show does where some pretty thick soled boots.
big show does where some pretty thick soled boots.
KingNick said on 21/May/07
topdweeb26 , you're entitled to your opinions man, but you gotta expect your gonna get opposing feedback when you have a bunch of wrestling fans reading your post.
topdweeb26 , you're entitled to your opinions man, but you gotta expect your gonna get opposing feedback when you have a bunch of wrestling fans reading your post.
topdweeb26 said on 21/May/07
Big Show: you're saying that simply getting injured some how legitimizes pro-wrestling? How about we invent a new "sport" where people purposely bang their head against the wall, and that's all you do. Would their injuries legitimize it? Wrestling IS fake ("choreographed" if you prefer that term), it's set up, all their injuries are either accidents or they actually planned to take a bump. In fact, one of the reasons wrestling is so dangerous nowadays (in that a lot of extreme risks are taken) is because it is fake, so they feel that they have to over-compensate with extreme situations to justify their existence as a sport/entertainment. And, no, I have never tried fake wrestling, but I myself have wrestled competitively for 6 years, have done Judo, am currently active in a MMA club where we practice BJJ, submission wrestling, and Muay Thai, and prior to that, I trained in TKD. The injuries I got from these sports/martial arts are real, they weren't planned, and none was choreographed.
Brock Lesnar was actually a bad example for me to use, by the way. I do respect his real wrestling background, same with Kurt Angle. And as a matter of fact, if he gets Hong Man Choi to the ground, I give it to him all the way.
Big Show: you're saying that simply getting injured some how legitimizes pro-wrestling? How about we invent a new "sport" where people purposely bang their head against the wall, and that's all you do. Would their injuries legitimize it? Wrestling IS fake ("choreographed" if you prefer that term), it's set up, all their injuries are either accidents or they actually planned to take a bump. In fact, one of the reasons wrestling is so dangerous nowadays (in that a lot of extreme risks are taken) is because it is fake, so they feel that they have to over-compensate with extreme situations to justify their existence as a sport/entertainment. And, no, I have never tried fake wrestling, but I myself have wrestled competitively for 6 years, have done Judo, am currently active in a MMA club where we practice BJJ, submission wrestling, and Muay Thai, and prior to that, I trained in TKD. The injuries I got from these sports/martial arts are real, they weren't planned, and none was choreographed.
Brock Lesnar was actually a bad example for me to use, by the way. I do respect his real wrestling background, same with Kurt Angle. And as a matter of fact, if he gets Hong Man Choi to the ground, I give it to him all the way.
Big Show said on 21/May/07
Topdweeb, next time you see a guy like Triple H, Hogan, Edge, Angle or more recently Shane Helms. Tell them to stop faking their injuries as it's not a real sport they're practicing. I'm wondering if you would still have all your teeth in your mouth after such a statement. Have you ever practiced wrestling yourself, because then you wouldn't make such a stupid comment. Let me tell you: wrestling is a real sport, that are no CGI characters you see on the screen, those are real life people and the injuries they sustain are also real life injuries. I hate it when people say wrestling is fake. It's not fake, it's choreographed (the only thing that's fake are the storylines and therefore the outcome of the match). When people talk about dancing they talk about choreography. What's the difference between dancing and wrestling. Wrestler are given a certain amount of time to create a spectacular match. They help each other out during that match (like selling each others moves or helping each other with the more difficult moves), but they still have to be incredible athletes to pull it off (although some wrestler show little athleticism).
In wrestling the key word is entertainment, not competition. Wrestlers are supposed to deliver a good match. And like every other sport there are good and there are bad athletes.
Brock Lesnar didn't make it in the NFL because he didn't have what it takes to become a Pro Football player, just like the other 90 % that gets eliminated during the pre-draft. Are they all bad athletes. No, just like every sport, athleticism can only get you to a certain point. You also need a great deal of talent to really make a name for yourselves in any sport.
Topdweeb, next time you see a guy like Triple H, Hogan, Edge, Angle or more recently Shane Helms. Tell them to stop faking their injuries as it's not a real sport they're practicing. I'm wondering if you would still have all your teeth in your mouth after such a statement. Have you ever practiced wrestling yourself, because then you wouldn't make such a stupid comment. Let me tell you: wrestling is a real sport, that are no CGI characters you see on the screen, those are real life people and the injuries they sustain are also real life injuries. I hate it when people say wrestling is fake. It's not fake, it's choreographed (the only thing that's fake are the storylines and therefore the outcome of the match). When people talk about dancing they talk about choreography. What's the difference between dancing and wrestling. Wrestler are given a certain amount of time to create a spectacular match. They help each other out during that match (like selling each others moves or helping each other with the more difficult moves), but they still have to be incredible athletes to pull it off (although some wrestler show little athleticism).
In wrestling the key word is entertainment, not competition. Wrestlers are supposed to deliver a good match. And like every other sport there are good and there are bad athletes.
Brock Lesnar didn't make it in the NFL because he didn't have what it takes to become a Pro Football player, just like the other 90 % that gets eliminated during the pre-draft. Are they all bad athletes. No, just like every sport, athleticism can only get you to a certain point. You also need a great deal of talent to really make a name for yourselves in any sport.
big show fan said on 20/May/07
i,m thinking big show has as much as 5 inches on kane and taker.
i,m thinking big show has as much as 5 inches on kane and taker.
big show fan said on 20/May/07
paul wight undergone an operation in the early 90,s he was 6'2" at age 12,age 14 he was 6'8" according to himself he,s 7'1" .the question is could he have grown another 5 inches in 6 years? i think it,s highly possible that could,ve.
paul wight undergone an operation in the early 90,s he was 6'2" at age 12,age 14 he was 6'8" according to himself he,s 7'1" .the question is could he have grown another 5 inches in 6 years? i think it,s highly possible that could,ve.
topdweeb26 said on 19/May/07
Guys, this is Hong Man Choi's first MMA fight too. He fights mainly in K-1 style kickboxing fights, which are not MMA. And it's ridiculous to say Lesnar is a great fighter just yet, as no one has seen him fight. And to be honest, I don't respect pro-wrestlers. I'm sorry, I think what they do is entertaining, and I think they might be great athletes (some of them) but most of them don't seem to be able to hack it when it comes to a real sport (Lesnar's football career anyone?)
Guys, this is Hong Man Choi's first MMA fight too. He fights mainly in K-1 style kickboxing fights, which are not MMA. And it's ridiculous to say Lesnar is a great fighter just yet, as no one has seen him fight. And to be honest, I don't respect pro-wrestlers. I'm sorry, I think what they do is entertaining, and I think they might be great athletes (some of them) but most of them don't seem to be able to hack it when it comes to a real sport (Lesnar's football career anyone?)
Alex said on 19/May/07
Lesnar vs HongMan is a shoot fight?
if so don't count Lesnar out because he's shorter and lighter but he's probably more stronger and has more muscle. I wouldn't be shocked if Lesnar wins.
Lesnar vs HongMan is a shoot fight?
if so don't count Lesnar out because he's shorter and lighter but he's probably more stronger and has more muscle. I wouldn't be shocked if Lesnar wins.
Jason said on 19/May/07
Hong-man is listed at 211cm (6'11'') on a French MMA site. This might be a very bad move on Lesnar's part; if he loses badly, then his credibility is gonna take a big blow.
Hong-man is listed at 211cm (6'11'') on a French MMA site. This might be a very bad move on Lesnar's part; if he loses badly, then his credibility is gonna take a big blow.
Big Show said on 19/May/07
Click Here
Here are a few pics of Hong-man Choi and Brock Lesnar. The low camera angles minimize height differences, but even then it doesn't look like Hong-Man would have a whole foot on Lesnar. The height difference looks the same as between Lesnar and Big Show from what I remember.
Choi is an experienced MMA fighter, so he'll have the edge when it comes to experience. If Lesnar can beat this K1 legend in his debut match, that would be impressive. In a wrestling match Lesnar would probably beat him in 3 seconds, but MMA is no wrestling. Lesnar is a good fighting machine: he's strong, he's fast and he's well coordinated, but his inexperience might cost him the victory. And I do not hope Lesnar gets massacred as I respect him as a fighter. Plus it takes guts to tell Vince McMahon to stick his contract up his a$$, when most wrestler's literally kiss Vince's a$$.
Click Here
Here are a few pics of Hong-man Choi and Brock Lesnar. The low camera angles minimize height differences, but even then it doesn't look like Hong-Man would have a whole foot on Lesnar. The height difference looks the same as between Lesnar and Big Show from what I remember.
Choi is an experienced MMA fighter, so he'll have the edge when it comes to experience. If Lesnar can beat this K1 legend in his debut match, that would be impressive. In a wrestling match Lesnar would probably beat him in 3 seconds, but MMA is no wrestling. Lesnar is a good fighting machine: he's strong, he's fast and he's well coordinated, but his inexperience might cost him the victory. And I do not hope Lesnar gets massacred as I respect him as a fighter. Plus it takes guts to tell Vince McMahon to stick his contract up his a$$, when most wrestler's literally kiss Vince's a$$.
andre fan said on 19/May/07
it appears to me when sow is standing next to someone of average height like 5'10".5'11" the top of their head is dead level with shows shoulder.from shoulder level to top of head on an average man is at least 12 inches, big shows case more 14-15 inches easy.
it appears to me when sow is standing next to someone of average height like 5'10".5'11" the top of their head is dead level with shows shoulder.from shoulder level to top of head on an average man is at least 12 inches, big shows case more 14-15 inches easy.
Jason said on 18/May/07
Yeah, the Hong-man's gonna win I think...
Yeah, the Hong-man's gonna win I think...
topdweeb26 said on 18/May/07
I think Big Show was 7' in WCW and think he is 7' today. I don't see a difference in height.
I think Big Show was 7' in WCW and think he is 7' today. I don't see a difference in height.
topdweeb26 said on 18/May/07
Can't wait... hope Lesnar gets massacred.
Can't wait... hope Lesnar gets massacred.
Jason said on 18/May/07
If Brock Lesnar compares the same to Hong-man Choi in the ring next month as he did in the publicity pics, it'll knock Akebono down to 6'5'' tops...
If Brock Lesnar compares the same to Hong-man Choi in the ring next month as he did in the publicity pics, it'll knock Akebono down to 6'5'' tops...
Danimal said on 17/May/07
I believe Big Show from his WCW days would have matched both Dalip in height and in weight. Today, I give the height advantage to Dalip and the weight advantage to Big Show.
I believe Big Show from his WCW days would have matched both Dalip in height and in weight. Today, I give the height advantage to Dalip and the weight advantage to Big Show.
topdweeb26 said on 17/May/07
Vegas: I believe he is only 1-inch taller than Big Show at the most. So since I believe Big Show is 7', I think Dalip is 7' 1.
Vegas: I believe he is only 1-inch taller than Big Show at the most. So since I believe Big Show is 7', I think Dalip is 7' 1.
Vegas said on 17/May/07
Yes Danimal I saw the original ECW as I was buying VHS (video) tapes from Fin Martin (editor of Powerslam magazine) circa 1995-97 and then they started showing it on tv here after that period.
Anyways I agree with what you said as does my statement, don't forget I was the one to say the WWF didn't have a clue what to do with Foley and Austin. Foley and Austin deserve the credit for getting themselves over, not Vince.
topdweeb26 how tall do you believe Dalip Singh is??
Yes Danimal I saw the original ECW as I was buying VHS (video) tapes from Fin Martin (editor of Powerslam magazine) circa 1995-97 and then they started showing it on tv here after that period.
Anyways I agree with what you said as does my statement, don't forget I was the one to say the WWF didn't have a clue what to do with Foley and Austin. Foley and Austin deserve the credit for getting themselves over, not Vince.
topdweeb26 how tall do you believe Dalip Singh is??
Arjun said on 17/May/07
Topdweeb26 said:-
"Show is a legit 7-footer"
Close enough to it. Surely a strong 6'11" when fully straight up even nowadays.
I agree completely topdweeb, Show's height has been proven by now.
Topdweeb26 said:-
"Show is a legit 7-footer"
Close enough to it. Surely a strong 6'11" when fully straight up even nowadays.
I agree completely topdweeb, Show's height has been proven by now.
Viper said on 16/May/07
It might have been a mistake in the end, but they complimented each other big time. Each one tried to out do each other every other week, thats what made it so great.
It might have been a mistake in the end, but they complimented each other big time. Each one tried to out do each other every other week, thats what made it so great.
topdweeb26 said on 16/May/07
Show is a legit 7-footer. I think that has been proven by now. Nitro wasn't on a different day or time than RAW because WCW wanted to directly compete with WWF. Which in the end was a big mistake.
Show is a legit 7-footer. I think that has been proven by now. Nitro wasn't on a different day or time than RAW because WCW wanted to directly compete with WWF. Which in the end was a big mistake.
Arjun said on 16/May/07
Show towers over Greene, easy 8 inches there.
Show towers over Greene, easy 8 inches there.
anonymous said on 16/May/07
big show looks at least 8-9 inches taller than 6'3" kevin green.
big show looks at least 8-9 inches taller than 6'3" kevin green.
wolverinejoe80 said on 16/May/07
ever since the rock left, WWE hasn't been the same IMO.
ever since the rock left, WWE hasn't been the same IMO.
wolverinejoe80 said on 16/May/07
nitro used to be so much better than Raw. didn't nitro led the ratings for about 2 years in a row, and then slowly died? why couldn't they just change to tuesday night nitro, so both WWE, WCW fans could watch?
i miss 90's nitro. WWE is not a crap, and i don't even care about wrestling anymore.
nitro used to be so much better than Raw. didn't nitro led the ratings for about 2 years in a row, and then slowly died? why couldn't they just change to tuesday night nitro, so both WWE, WCW fans could watch?
i miss 90's nitro. WWE is not a crap, and i don't even care about wrestling anymore.
JT said on 16/May/07
Big Show and defensive end/linebacker Kevin Greene, which the NFL listed at 6
Big Show and defensive end/linebacker Kevin Greene, which the NFL listed at 6
topdweeb26 said on 15/May/07
Vegas: yeah the competition between the two brought out the best of both organizations; as I said, that's the only reason I even miss WCW. Many disagree with me, but I thought WCW flat out sucked. I still watched RAW even when Nitro was at its peak... the only time I watched Nitro was when RAW was on a commercial break. As for Austin and Foley, sure their own talent and input may be one of the keys to their success, but I don't buy for even a second that WWF wasn't a big part of it. Otherwise, why didn't Austin become Stone Cold in WCW? Or why wasn't Foley Mankind in WCW? Because either 1. WCW didn't allow them to have any creativity over their characters or 2. because WWF is the one who thought up of it... and I'm pretty sure Austin said that WWF came up with the Stone Cold gimmick.
And I do agree that since WWE doesn't have serious competition, they have gotten lazy and their product sucks now. I don't even watch it any more. And I remember it used to be sad to see my favorite wrestlers jump ship. Now it's like, "Oh no, my favorite wrestler moved from RAW to SmackDown!"
Vegas: yeah the competition between the two brought out the best of both organizations; as I said, that's the only reason I even miss WCW. Many disagree with me, but I thought WCW flat out sucked. I still watched RAW even when Nitro was at its peak... the only time I watched Nitro was when RAW was on a commercial break. As for Austin and Foley, sure their own talent and input may be one of the keys to their success, but I don't buy for even a second that WWF wasn't a big part of it. Otherwise, why didn't Austin become Stone Cold in WCW? Or why wasn't Foley Mankind in WCW? Because either 1. WCW didn't allow them to have any creativity over their characters or 2. because WWF is the one who thought up of it... and I'm pretty sure Austin said that WWF came up with the Stone Cold gimmick.
And I do agree that since WWE doesn't have serious competition, they have gotten lazy and their product sucks now. I don't even watch it any more. And I remember it used to be sad to see my favorite wrestlers jump ship. Now it's like, "Oh no, my favorite wrestler moved from RAW to SmackDown!"
Viper said on 15/May/07
Vegas, you are 100 percent correct there. The worst thing to ever happen to the WWE was purchasing WCW. The fierce competition between WWE and WCW in the mid to late 90s was just unbeleivable. They brought out the absolute best in each other. On Monday nights I remember clicking back and forth repeatedly between Monday night Nitro and Raw is War. I couldnt keep it on one channel because the other one might have had something great like Mick Foley in a cage match, or seeing what would happen next in the NWO. Seems like wrestling is far away from those great days :(
Vegas, you are 100 percent correct there. The worst thing to ever happen to the WWE was purchasing WCW. The fierce competition between WWE and WCW in the mid to late 90s was just unbeleivable. They brought out the absolute best in each other. On Monday nights I remember clicking back and forth repeatedly between Monday night Nitro and Raw is War. I couldnt keep it on one channel because the other one might have had something great like Mick Foley in a cage match, or seeing what would happen next in the NWO. Seems like wrestling is far away from those great days :(
Alex said on 15/May/07
Vegas, the first diva search in 2004 I actually liked, forget about the other 2.
Vegas, the first diva search in 2004 I actually liked, forget about the other 2.
Alex said on 15/May/07
I'm not going to make this long since its a height site but WWE started going down hill in 2004 but was still good at times. 2006 and on was when it started to get worse. 2007 is the pits for the most part. Best years in WWE were from 98-02. 2003 was good too.
I'm not going to make this long since its a height site but WWE started going down hill in 2004 but was still good at times. 2006 and on was when it started to get worse. 2007 is the pits for the most part. Best years in WWE were from 98-02. 2003 was good too.
Vegas said on 15/May/07
I disagree Viper about Jamal. I too hated that character. I was there in Chicago the night (Raw after WM22) he made his WWE debut as Umaga and I thought this gimmick blows! But he really came alive and dragged Cena to a memorable match at Royal Rumble (that match was amazing to witness live in the arena; don't know how it came across on tv though). His madman ramblings are hilarious and I believe Vince has big things planned for him and Bobby Lashley down the line.
Singh has been well used so far, I think Vince and Dunn realise they f****d up big time with Paul Wight and they are currently using Singh as he should be used.
Tna have loads of top guys like Joe, Daniels, Angle, Styles, Christian, Abyss, homicide and soon to be RVD that there is no need to be pushing washed up guys like Steiner.
I disagree Viper about Jamal. I too hated that character. I was there in Chicago the night (Raw after WM22) he made his WWE debut as Umaga and I thought this gimmick blows! But he really came alive and dragged Cena to a memorable match at Royal Rumble (that match was amazing to witness live in the arena; don't know how it came across on tv though). His madman ramblings are hilarious and I believe Vince has big things planned for him and Bobby Lashley down the line.
Singh has been well used so far, I think Vince and Dunn realise they f****d up big time with Paul Wight and they are currently using Singh as he should be used.
Tna have loads of top guys like Joe, Daniels, Angle, Styles, Christian, Abyss, homicide and soon to be RVD that there is no need to be pushing washed up guys like Steiner.
Vegas said on 15/May/07
topdweeb26 WWF/WWE have let many guys go such as Samoa Joe, Chris Daniels, Christian, AJ Styles and they have gone on to become stars, ok not big worldwide stars (yet) because TNA and ROH etc are still relatively small feds.
True WCW didn't know what to do with the likes of Foley or Austin but both of those guys deserve the credit for getting themselves over, rather than anything the WWE front office did. Look at the way they had Austin jobbing to the likes of Savio Vega when he first started, they had no clue what to do with him either. Foley himself came up with the mankind gimmick after WWF creative team had decided on a really stupid gimmick for him and he flatly refused to do it!!
WCW especially after the arrivals of Nash and Hall gave the WWF the kick up the a** they needed at the time. Watching pro wrestling from June 1996 to mid 1998 was exciting; story lines and characters on both sides were fresh. Nowadays nothing (big show has highlighted a few of the bad things; you'll be glad to know Big Show that a new Diva search is starting very soon; i cant contain my excitement :D). The WWE don't have to worry anymore; they have become lazy without the strong competition WCW provided during the 1990s.
topdweeb26 WWF/WWE have let many guys go such as Samoa Joe, Chris Daniels, Christian, AJ Styles and they have gone on to become stars, ok not big worldwide stars (yet) because TNA and ROH etc are still relatively small feds.
True WCW didn't know what to do with the likes of Foley or Austin but both of those guys deserve the credit for getting themselves over, rather than anything the WWE front office did. Look at the way they had Austin jobbing to the likes of Savio Vega when he first started, they had no clue what to do with him either. Foley himself came up with the mankind gimmick after WWF creative team had decided on a really stupid gimmick for him and he flatly refused to do it!!
WCW especially after the arrivals of Nash and Hall gave the WWF the kick up the a** they needed at the time. Watching pro wrestling from June 1996 to mid 1998 was exciting; story lines and characters on both sides were fresh. Nowadays nothing (big show has highlighted a few of the bad things; you'll be glad to know Big Show that a new Diva search is starting very soon; i cant contain my excitement :D). The WWE don't have to worry anymore; they have become lazy without the strong competition WCW provided during the 1990s.
Viper said on 15/May/07
TNA is like WCW in 2000. It just sucks. It is, quite simply, just an unwatchable product that reaks of WCW leftovers and there's nothing worse than leftovers of something truly terrible. When your mark out moment of the night is one of the charisma-sucking Steiner brothers making an appearance, you're in a world of hurt. It is sad that WWE is so far ahead of TNA that chumps like Khali and Jamal from 3 minute warning are main event players right now. TNA stepping up and challenging makes WWE a much better product. I hope TNA can gain some momentum from the solid PPV and get the WWE fans to give it a chance
TNA is like WCW in 2000. It just sucks. It is, quite simply, just an unwatchable product that reaks of WCW leftovers and there's nothing worse than leftovers of something truly terrible. When your mark out moment of the night is one of the charisma-sucking Steiner brothers making an appearance, you're in a world of hurt. It is sad that WWE is so far ahead of TNA that chumps like Khali and Jamal from 3 minute warning are main event players right now. TNA stepping up and challenging makes WWE a much better product. I hope TNA can gain some momentum from the solid PPV and get the WWE fans to give it a chance
topdweeb26 said on 15/May/07
I don't know, I always thought WCW always seem like the brand-X of wrestling. I mean, to me the WWF was always better and more interesting. And WCW's inability of being able to create new stars eventually caught up to them (not to mention they had a knack of ruining established stars like Hennig). I mean, it's insane when you think of all the wrestlers that were let go by WCW and went to the WWF and became huge. Prime example is Steve Austin. Before the WWF he was a nobody. After the WWF he was one of the biggest stars the industry has ever seen. I'm glad WCW is gone. The ONLY reason I miss WCW is because it was always interesting watching the two organizations compete.
I don't know, I always thought WCW always seem like the brand-X of wrestling. I mean, to me the WWF was always better and more interesting. And WCW's inability of being able to create new stars eventually caught up to them (not to mention they had a knack of ruining established stars like Hennig). I mean, it's insane when you think of all the wrestlers that were let go by WCW and went to the WWF and became huge. Prime example is Steve Austin. Before the WWF he was a nobody. After the WWF he was one of the biggest stars the industry has ever seen. I'm glad WCW is gone. The ONLY reason I miss WCW is because it was always interesting watching the two organizations compete.
Big Show said on 15/May/07
I started watching wrestling on a frequent basis in 1997 (it was the first time wrestling was ever broadcasted onto Dutch TV). I must say that WCW at that time was better than what I've ever seen on the WWF so far. The only thing that came close was the Invasion angle in 2001 when WCW and ECW invaded the WWF.
What I really liked about WCW back then were the big fueds between NWO B/W and NWO Wolfpac. When a guy of either group would fight each other you would know that NWO B/W at some point in the match would flock to the ring with 5 or 6 time to break up the match. Then NWO Wolfpac would also come and you have a big fight in the middle of the ring. Shame that those things are not used in the WWE anymore (the Evolution Angle was a complete fluke).
You talk about bad angles in the 90's, what about nowadays with characters like the Boogeyman, the Highlanders (which is in insult to Scottish people), Drag Queen Vito (this guy must've been short on cash or really eager to be in the WWE, to go along with that stupid angle. Btw. he's been put out of his misery now), Eugene, etc. And what to think about those stupid Diva searches, which no one ever cares about. They can't wrestle and are only brought in to sell magazines or get a contract with Playboy, which would gather WWE more mainstream attention (although in my oppinion it's the wrong attention they're getting).
I started watching wrestling on a frequent basis in 1997 (it was the first time wrestling was ever broadcasted onto Dutch TV). I must say that WCW at that time was better than what I've ever seen on the WWF so far. The only thing that came close was the Invasion angle in 2001 when WCW and ECW invaded the WWF.
What I really liked about WCW back then were the big fueds between NWO B/W and NWO Wolfpac. When a guy of either group would fight each other you would know that NWO B/W at some point in the match would flock to the ring with 5 or 6 time to break up the match. Then NWO Wolfpac would also come and you have a big fight in the middle of the ring. Shame that those things are not used in the WWE anymore (the Evolution Angle was a complete fluke).
You talk about bad angles in the 90's, what about nowadays with characters like the Boogeyman, the Highlanders (which is in insult to Scottish people), Drag Queen Vito (this guy must've been short on cash or really eager to be in the WWE, to go along with that stupid angle. Btw. he's been put out of his misery now), Eugene, etc. And what to think about those stupid Diva searches, which no one ever cares about. They can't wrestle and are only brought in to sell magazines or get a contract with Playboy, which would gather WWE more mainstream attention (although in my oppinion it's the wrong attention they're getting).
Frank said on 15/May/07
When the WCW created The NWO and made Hogan a bad guy was the Best Ever and they Blew The WWF Away!!!!!
When the WCW created The NWO and made Hogan a bad guy was the Best Ever and they Blew The WWF Away!!!!!
Arjun said on 15/May/07
Mike, I would say it's not more than 11 inches, because Gonzales has around a 12 inch head, and he is lifting his head and Taker is still a little above his chin.
Mike, I would say it's not more than 11 inches, because Gonzales has around a 12 inch head, and he is lifting his head and Taker is still a little above his chin.
topdweeb26 said on 14/May/07
Vegas: to be fair to the WWE, all those gimmicks were around (The Goon, Gobbledy Gooker, Kwang, Mantaur, etc) WAY before WCW kicked the WWE's ass. So those gimmicks had absolutely nothing to do with it. WCW kicked WWE's ass for other reasons. WCW was a joke until Hulk Hogan arrived on the scene. Before Hogan, WCW seemed like it was the brand X of wrestling, but when he got there, it was taken a lot more seriously. But that still didn't allow WCW to beat WWE. Then WWE simply lost too many big stars at one time (mainly Kevin Nash and Scott Hall). And then the way they made people believe Nash and Hall were still with the WWE but were going to war with WCW had a lot of people in intridgued. However, WCW soon learned that while they could steal the established stars of WWE, the one thing they really lacked as the ability to make full use of their current stars, and make new stars themselves, so in the end, WWE won. The only major star that WCW made during that whole 2 years was Goldberg. That was it. And I personally never liked WCW. There was always something about their shows that seemed dark and uncolorful, which made it feel dull and depressing. WWE seemed to have better lighting, more colorful, and just full of more life.
Vegas: to be fair to the WWE, all those gimmicks were around (The Goon, Gobbledy Gooker, Kwang, Mantaur, etc) WAY before WCW kicked the WWE's ass. So those gimmicks had absolutely nothing to do with it. WCW kicked WWE's ass for other reasons. WCW was a joke until Hulk Hogan arrived on the scene. Before Hogan, WCW seemed like it was the brand X of wrestling, but when he got there, it was taken a lot more seriously. But that still didn't allow WCW to beat WWE. Then WWE simply lost too many big stars at one time (mainly Kevin Nash and Scott Hall). And then the way they made people believe Nash and Hall were still with the WWE but were going to war with WCW had a lot of people in intridgued. However, WCW soon learned that while they could steal the established stars of WWE, the one thing they really lacked as the ability to make full use of their current stars, and make new stars themselves, so in the end, WWE won. The only major star that WCW made during that whole 2 years was Goldberg. That was it. And I personally never liked WCW. There was always something about their shows that seemed dark and uncolorful, which made it feel dull and depressing. WWE seemed to have better lighting, more colorful, and just full of more life.
Alex said on 14/May/07
Gonzalez easily did get away with 8'0 on TV or at least 7'10. A legit 7'6 can get away with looking 8'0.
Gonzalez easily did get away with 8'0 on TV or at least 7'10. A legit 7'6 can get away with looking 8'0.
mike m said on 14/May/07
vegas i would still say 10 inches leaving gonzales 7'6" and taker 6'8".
vegas i would still say 10 inches leaving gonzales 7'6" and taker 6'8".
Arjun said on 14/May/07
Vegas, I would say about 11 inches between Taker and Gonzales.
Vegas, I would say about 11 inches between Taker and Gonzales.
Vegas said on 14/May/07
Gonzales rarely if ever stood up straight. His back was always arched and his head nearly always dropping. Here is a good pic of him and taker and it looks a clear 11-12" to me Click Here Dont forget Gonzo had a 12"+ head too.
And yes viper the cave man suit was one of the stupidest ideas in WWF history; but i suppose seeing as the likes of Bastion Booger, Mantaur, Kwang, The Goon, Abe "knuckleball" Schwartz and the Gobbeldy Gooker (oh the pain!!!) were prancing around the WWF rings at the same time it didn't look that out of place back then :D
The WWF creative department in the early 1990s, geniuses the lot of them; and they still wonder why WCW kicked their a** for two straight years!!!
Gonzales rarely if ever stood up straight. His back was always arched and his head nearly always dropping. Here is a good pic of him and taker and it looks a clear 11-12" to me Click Here Dont forget Gonzo had a 12"+ head too.
And yes viper the cave man suit was one of the stupidest ideas in WWF history; but i suppose seeing as the likes of Bastion Booger, Mantaur, Kwang, The Goon, Abe "knuckleball" Schwartz and the Gobbeldy Gooker (oh the pain!!!) were prancing around the WWF rings at the same time it didn't look that out of place back then :D
The WWF creative department in the early 1990s, geniuses the lot of them; and they still wonder why WCW kicked their a** for two straight years!!!
anonymous said on 14/May/07
gonzales has 2 ft on harvey wippleman if he,s 5'6".i remember taker was about up to the bottom of is chin,and was not quite 12 inches shorter maybe 9-10 inches.
gonzales has 2 ft on harvey wippleman if he,s 5'6".i remember taker was about up to the bottom of is chin,and was not quite 12 inches shorter maybe 9-10 inches.
Danimal said on 13/May/07
Sid was being billed at 6'7" early on in his career. I don't believe he was ever taller than that.
Sid next to Kevin Nash. Granted, Sid isn't standing straight, but I still see a solid 6'7" guy standing next to 6'9"-6'10" Nash: Click Here
Sid was being billed at 6'7" early on in his career. I don't believe he was ever taller than that.
Sid next to Kevin Nash. Granted, Sid isn't standing straight, but I still see a solid 6'7" guy standing next to 6'9"-6'10" Nash: Click Here
Danimal said on 13/May/07
Sid was being billed at 6'7" early on in his career. I don't believe he was ever taller than that.
Sid was being billed at 6'7" early on in his career. I don't believe he was ever taller than that.
Vegas said on 13/May/07
Gonzales had a full head on Sid Eudy and his head was 12"+ i suspect. He isnt even standing fully straight there with Eudy with his head dropping down!!! Click Here
Sid was between 6'6 and 6'7 barefoot. I would say 99% of people on this site will agree with that. He was 2" shorter than kevin Nash and approx the same height as taker
Gonzales had a full head on Sid Eudy and his head was 12"+ i suspect. He isnt even standing fully straight there with Eudy with his head dropping down!!! Click Here
Sid was between 6'6 and 6'7 barefoot. I would say 99% of people on this site will agree with that. He was 2" shorter than kevin Nash and approx the same height as taker
topdweeb26 said on 13/May/07
All this proves to me now is how hard it is to tell exactly how much taller someone is just by "eyeing it". Sid is not 6' 9 or 6' 10, I have seen him in real life. He looked only about 6' 6 or 6' 7 to me, and yes, this was in his wrestling attire. When Nash came out later that night, I could easily tell he was taller than Sid. Gonzalez is a legit 7' 6 according to Guinness records, and Sid isn't even as tall as Nash and Nash is 6' 10, heck even the Undertaker is slightly taller than Sid and the Undertaker once said he was 6' 8 on a Smackdown episode. So that means Sid is really a about 6' 7, so if you guys aren't seeing a 12 inch difference, then that again, shows how hard it is to be exact to the exact inch by eyeing it.
All this proves to me now is how hard it is to tell exactly how much taller someone is just by "eyeing it". Sid is not 6' 9 or 6' 10, I have seen him in real life. He looked only about 6' 6 or 6' 7 to me, and yes, this was in his wrestling attire. When Nash came out later that night, I could easily tell he was taller than Sid. Gonzalez is a legit 7' 6 according to Guinness records, and Sid isn't even as tall as Nash and Nash is 6' 10, heck even the Undertaker is slightly taller than Sid and the Undertaker once said he was 6' 8 on a Smackdown episode. So that means Sid is really a about 6' 7, so if you guys aren't seeing a 12 inch difference, then that again, shows how hard it is to be exact to the exact inch by eyeing it.
mike m said on 13/May/07
after reviewing the footage,sid doesn,t appear 12 inches shorter than el gigante i,d say 7-8 inches at the most. sid was definitely taller than 6'6" more like 6'9" to 6'10" at most.
after reviewing the footage,sid doesn,t appear 12 inches shorter than el gigante i,d say 7-8 inches at the most. sid was definitely taller than 6'6" more like 6'9" to 6'10" at most.
Vegas said on 13/May/07
Wippleman looks about 5'6 next to Lawler to me.
topdweeb26 I never even noticed that about Gonzales being taller than the pillars, wow. I agree he will prob never be matched height wise again in the ring. Here is a pic of jerry lawler and another guy who Halb found was billed at 7'7 in the early 1970s Stan Fraiser Click Here
Wippleman looks about 5'6 next to Lawler to me.
topdweeb26 I never even noticed that about Gonzales being taller than the pillars, wow. I agree he will prob never be matched height wise again in the ring. Here is a pic of jerry lawler and another guy who Halb found was billed at 7'7 in the early 1970s Stan Fraiser Click Here
Danimal said on 19/Oct/06
Canstop, you still amaze me after being on here for as long as you've been. How can you base height on Nash in a movie? Anyone can be made to be any height in a movie. That's not real life my friend. Ever see Green Mile. Just so you know, that black dude, wasn't really 10 feet tall in real life ;).
Furthermore, Big show WAS a tall man back in his day. Like Andre, he has lost some height and he's only 33-34 years old, which is kind of sad. People doubt that Andre hadn't lost any height by 1983, when he was already 36-37...lol. Yeah RIGHT!
Canstop, you still amaze me after being on here for as long as you've been. How can you base height on Nash in a movie? Anyone can be made to be any height in a movie. That's not real life my friend. Ever see Green Mile. Just so you know, that black dude, wasn't really 10 feet tall in real life ;).
Furthermore, Big show WAS a tall man back in his day. Like Andre, he has lost some height and he's only 33-34 years old, which is kind of sad. People doubt that Andre hadn't lost any height by 1983, when he was already 36-37...lol. Yeah RIGHT!
cantstop25 said on 19/Oct/06
wow show towers nash there, he could have worn lifts in wcw to look even more massive. Nash is a legit 6'10", I have prrof from pics I took from the longest yard. WHich I will put on nash's page soon enough. Is it just me or does show look nearly 4 inches taller then nash in that first pic? But eyah shows footwear def added more then nash's
wow show towers nash there, he could have worn lifts in wcw to look even more massive. Nash is a legit 6'10", I have prrof from pics I took from the longest yard. WHich I will put on nash's page soon enough. Is it just me or does show look nearly 4 inches taller then nash in that first pic? But eyah shows footwear def added more then nash's
Danimal said on 18/Oct/06
It's possible Bulldog was 5'8" by 1996. He was 5'9" years earlier. His partner was 5'8" (The Dynamite Kid).
It's possible Bulldog was 5'8" by 1996. He was 5'9" years earlier. His partner was 5'8" (The Dynamite Kid).
Danimal said on 18/Oct/06
Alex, as I've mentioned before, the BRitish Bulldog was billed at 5'11" for at least 7 years in the WWF before any other listing, BUT, he was listed at 5'9" (his true height) well before entering the WWF. I have an old magazine of him. He also gained 40 pounds from the 80's to the 90's and then lost it again, after dropping the roids. He was solid, but SHORT. Shorter than me.
Alex, as I've mentioned before, the BRitish Bulldog was billed at 5'11" for at least 7 years in the WWF before any other listing, BUT, he was listed at 5'9" (his true height) well before entering the WWF. I have an old magazine of him. He also gained 40 pounds from the 80's to the 90's and then lost it again, after dropping the roids. He was solid, but SHORT. Shorter than me.
Alex said on 18/Oct/06
I knew Bulldog was under 6'0 for sure but not by that much I didn't think.
I knew Bulldog was under 6'0 for sure but not by that much I didn't think.
Frank said on 18/Oct/06
Viper, 5ft 8 for Bulldog could be right he walked right by me and he looked alot shorter than me and im 5ft 11 1/2 so 5ft 8 sounds right 5ft 9 topps
Viper, 5ft 8 for Bulldog could be right he walked right by me and he looked alot shorter than me and im 5ft 11 1/2 so 5ft 8 sounds right 5ft 9 topps
Viper652 said on 18/Oct/06
Shoot, the mentors list had Bullsog at 5-8.
Shoot, the mentors list had Bullsog at 5-8.
Frank said on 18/Oct/06
Alex, he looked short i seen him in his street clothes going into Madison Square Garden....I believe he wore good size lifts in his Wrestling boots to appear in the 6ft range
Alex, he looked short i seen him in his street clothes going into Madison Square Garden....I believe he wore good size lifts in his Wrestling boots to appear in the 6ft range
Alex said on 18/Oct/06
The British Bulldog I thought was more 5'10ish. I do remember him being billed at 6'3 toward the end of his career, but before that it was 6'0.
The British Bulldog I thought was more 5'10ish. I do remember him being billed at 6'3 toward the end of his career, but before that it was 6'0.
Viper652 said on 18/Oct/06
Why in the world did they bill British Bulldog at 6-3?
Why in the world did they bill British Bulldog at 6-3?
Frank said on 18/Oct/06
The British Bulldog was about 5ft 9 topps i seen him uo close but in the ring he looked alot taller (lifts)
The British Bulldog was about 5ft 9 topps i seen him uo close but in the ring he looked alot taller (lifts)
Alex said on 17/Oct/06
This picture of Big Show was when he weighed 420lbs in 1999. He was in pretty decent shape here. In 2000 then he was up to 430lbs he said on a radio show then it was after that where he began to gain more weight and since really hasn't lost any except for one period of time but he gained it right back. I am talking about in later 2001 then by mid 2002 he gained it all back
Click Here
This picture of Big Show was when he weighed 420lbs in 1999. He was in pretty decent shape here. In 2000 then he was up to 430lbs he said on a radio show then it was after that where he began to gain more weight and since really hasn't lost any except for one period of time but he gained it right back. I am talking about in later 2001 then by mid 2002 he gained it all back
Click Here
wilbur said on 17/Oct/06
Triple H is atleast 6'2. possibly 6'3
Triple H is atleast 6'2. possibly 6'3
Vegas said on 17/Oct/06
ya never met harry but have been informed as such. Dallas a def 6'5.5 he said so himself when i met him in chicago in april. He towered over alot of wwe stars in attendance eg ted dibiase, steve austin, jim ross
ya never met harry but have been informed as such. Dallas a def 6'5.5 he said so himself when i met him in chicago in april. He towered over alot of wwe stars in attendance eg ted dibiase, steve austin, jim ross
Alex said on 17/Oct/06
Harry Smith and Dallas Hart are 6'5 plus?
Harry Smith and Dallas Hart are 6'5 plus?
Viper652 said on 17/Oct/06
Im starting to beleive Danimal's estimate of 5-9 1/2 for Bret.
Im starting to beleive Danimal's estimate of 5-9 1/2 for Bret.
Vegas said on 17/Oct/06
Funny that both bret and davey were about 5'11 and both Harry Smith and Dallas Hart (their sons) are 6'5+
Funny that both bret and davey were about 5'11 and both Harry Smith and Dallas Hart (their sons) are 6'5+
Dkko said on 16/Oct/06
Yes indeed Dani, Davey Boy was no more tall than 5-11, but his son (I saw him in a house show about 4 months ago) is definetively a tall kid, he was taking on a jobber and he just dwarfed the guy, I think the kid's about the Randy Orton
height range
Yes indeed Dani, Davey Boy was no more tall than 5-11, but his son (I saw him in a house show about 4 months ago) is definetively a tall kid, he was taking on a jobber and he just dwarfed the guy, I think the kid's about the Randy Orton
height range
Danimal said on 16/Oct/06
I met Bret in Calgary. I'm 5'10". He wasn't any taller than I was. Davey Boy Smith was shorter than me by about an inch when I met him in Montreal.
I met Bret in Calgary. I'm 5'10". He wasn't any taller than I was. Davey Boy Smith was shorter than me by about an inch when I met him in Montreal.
Frank said on 16/Oct/06
On the day i met The Undertaker Bret Hart was there and Randy Savage they were both wearing cowboys boots with Lifts in them because they both appeared tall
I know people who have met Bret hart and they told me was about my height or alittle shorter....The reason i say there were lifts in them is because i have cowboy boots and they do not make me much taller
On the day i met The Undertaker Bret Hart was there and Randy Savage they were both wearing cowboys boots with Lifts in them because they both appeared tall
I know people who have met Bret hart and they told me was about my height or alittle shorter....The reason i say there were lifts in them is because i have cowboy boots and they do not make me much taller
Frank said on 16/Oct/06
Danimal,i believe Anvil wore Lifts just like The British Bulldog...I cant see Bret under 5ft 11 too be honest
Danimal,i believe Anvil wore Lifts just like The British Bulldog...I cant see Bret under 5ft 11 too be honest
Alex said on 15/Oct/06
Bret Hart looks about 5'11. He was listed at 6'0 or 6'1.
Bret Hart looks about 5'11. He was listed at 6'0 or 6'1.
Danimal said on 15/Oct/06
At that time, Hogan was just under 6'5" and Frank, that proves that Bret Hart was even shorter, because Jim Anvil was an inch taller than Bret. Bret was under 5'10" (shorter than HBK)
At that time, Hogan was just under 6'5" and Frank, that proves that Bret Hart was even shorter, because Jim Anvil was an inch taller than Bret. Bret was under 5'10" (shorter than HBK)
Frank said on 15/Oct/06
I met Jim The Anvil Neidhart at an Italian feast and i was surprized that i was clearly taller than him and on Hogans show Thunder n Paridise Hogan did not tower Anvil which makes me believe Hogan was not wearing lifts on that show and that show was on 12 years ago
I met Jim The Anvil Neidhart at an Italian feast and i was surprized that i was clearly taller than him and on Hogans show Thunder n Paridise Hogan did not tower Anvil which makes me believe Hogan was not wearing lifts on that show and that show was on 12 years ago
Alex said on 14/Oct/06
Frank, during the UFC match between Shamrock and Ortiz it wasn't more than 3 inches difference. Shamrock 5'10 and Ortiz 6'1 tops maybe?
Frank, during the UFC match between Shamrock and Ortiz it wasn't more than 3 inches difference. Shamrock 5'10 and Ortiz 6'1 tops maybe?
Danimal said on 14/Oct/06
Bret is not that tall Frank. I met him. He's under 5'11".
Bret is not that tall Frank. I met him. He's under 5'11".
Frank said on 14/Oct/06
Alex your right Shamrock is about 5ft 10 at best but a guy i work with is about 6ft 2 and he has a picture with Ortiz and he is about the same size so Ortiz could be 6ft 2....The reason i think Shamrock is 5ft 10 is because Bret Hart was taller than him and Bret is 5ft 11 to 6ft
Alex your right Shamrock is about 5ft 10 at best but a guy i work with is about 6ft 2 and he has a picture with Ortiz and he is about the same size so Ortiz could be 6ft 2....The reason i think Shamrock is 5ft 10 is because Bret Hart was taller than him and Bret is 5ft 11 to 6ft
Alex said on 14/Oct/06
Test is at least 6'5, possibly 6'6. Shamrock in the UFC gets listed at 6'0 when he really looks more 5'10. They listed Tito Ortiz at 6'2 when he is really 6'0 I think.
Test is at least 6'5, possibly 6'6. Shamrock in the UFC gets listed at 6'0 when he really looks more 5'10. They listed Tito Ortiz at 6'2 when he is really 6'0 I think.
Danimal said on 14/Oct/06
I believe that Big Show was indeed a legite 7'0" at one point. Today I give him nothing more than 6'11".
I believe that Big Show was indeed a legite 7'0" at one point. Today I give him nothing more than 6'11".
JK said on 14/Oct/06
I think Big show is 7'0'' as Rob lists him...
I think Big show is 7'0'' as Rob lists him...
JT said on 13/Oct/06
Nice pic, Cantstop25. Shamrock doesn't look like the world's most dangerous man next to Big Show, does he?
Also check out Big Show relative to Test and Foley. Test is around 6'6" and Big Show looks at least 7 inches taller than him (his eye level is around 2 inches above the top of Test's head; Big Show also has a huge noggin). Big Show could be wearing big boots or maybe he really was 7'1" back in the late 90s like he claimed. Foley's 6'2" or 6'3" and Big Show looks almost a head taller than him.
Nice pic, Cantstop25. Shamrock doesn't look like the world's most dangerous man next to Big Show, does he?
Also check out Big Show relative to Test and Foley. Test is around 6'6" and Big Show looks at least 7 inches taller than him (his eye level is around 2 inches above the top of Test's head; Big Show also has a huge noggin). Big Show could be wearing big boots or maybe he really was 7'1" back in the late 90s like he claimed. Foley's 6'2" or 6'3" and Big Show looks almost a head taller than him.
Danimal said on 13/Oct/06
That's Big Show prior to any noticable height loss.
That's Big Show prior to any noticable height loss.
Danimal said on 13/Oct/06
JK, you're only 15 years old. Don't forget that. YES, some cowboy boots give people 3". Take your tape measurement and go find out.
JK, you're only 15 years old. Don't forget that. YES, some cowboy boots give people 3". Take your tape measurement and go find out.
Alex said on 13/Oct/06
Austin's boots I think give him 2 inches of height so he's 6'2 in his big boots that you'll see him in sometimes.
Austin's boots I think give him 2 inches of height so he's 6'2 in his big boots that you'll see him in sometimes.
Alex said on 13/Oct/06
Paul, I am not going to meet Austin.
Paul, I am not going to meet Austin.
cantstop25 said on 13/Oct/06
Whatever this is teh big shows page,
look at him completely tower over shamrock, who is probably a legit 5'10-5'11"
Click Here
well over a foot there!
Whatever this is teh big shows page,
look at him completely tower over shamrock, who is probably a legit 5'10-5'11"
Click Here
well over a foot there!
JK said on 13/Oct/06
Ive never in my life seen or heard of a boot that givs u 3 inches lol, a boot can only give 1.5 inches and that is the MAX, only elevator shoes give 3 inches+
Ive never in my life seen or heard of a boot that givs u 3 inches lol, a boot can only give 1.5 inches and that is the MAX, only elevator shoes give 3 inches+
Danimal said on 13/Oct/06
Cantstop, Austin only appears as tall as 6'2" Vince McMahon, is because Austin is wearing his beloved boots, which probably give him a total of 3", whereby Vince only needs an inch heel to put him up to 6'3".
Cantstop, Austin only appears as tall as 6'2" Vince McMahon, is because Austin is wearing his beloved boots, which probably give him a total of 3", whereby Vince only needs an inch heel to put him up to 6'3".
Alex said on 12/Oct/06
Every face off between Austin and HHH, HHH had Austin by 1.5 inches, maybe closer to 2 inches.
Every face off between Austin and HHH, HHH had Austin by 1.5 inches, maybe closer to 2 inches.
supes78 said on 12/Oct/06
Okay, here is Big Show with 6'2" Andy Richter and 6'4" Conan O' Brien;
Click Here
Now, here is Big Show with 7'1" Dalip Singh;
Click Here
He looks like a legitimate 7-footer in all these pics. From what I've noticed, Big Show rarely shows good posture (probably because he's used to having to look down at people) so it can give the impression that he's shorter than he actually is. You can see in the Dalip Singh pic that Show's slouching while Singh is standing completely straight. He has much better posture in the pic with Conan and thus looks the full 7 feet.
Okay, here is Big Show with 6'2" Andy Richter and 6'4" Conan O' Brien;
Click Here
Now, here is Big Show with 7'1" Dalip Singh;
Click Here
He looks like a legitimate 7-footer in all these pics. From what I've noticed, Big Show rarely shows good posture (probably because he's used to having to look down at people) so it can give the impression that he's shorter than he actually is. You can see in the Dalip Singh pic that Show's slouching while Singh is standing completely straight. He has much better posture in the pic with Conan and thus looks the full 7 feet.
cantstop25 said on 12/Oct/06
Danimal I will be honest I am not on austins page too often, bu I will admit at tiem he can appear 6' however I contribute that to bad posture, I asumes austin at 6'1.5" because that is what vinnie mac is listed at on the site and I would say that they are about the sae height. Here are some pictures of austin with 5'11" stacy keibler in heels
Click Here
Danimal I will be honest I am not on austins page too often, bu I will admit at tiem he can appear 6' however I contribute that to bad posture, I asumes austin at 6'1.5" because that is what vinnie mac is listed at on the site and I would say that they are about the sae height. Here are some pictures of austin with 5'11" stacy keibler in heels
Click Here
Paul said on 12/Oct/06
Alex, aren't you going to meet some wrestlers soon ? Austin ? Tell him to his face he isn't 6'2, dare ya.
Alex, aren't you going to meet some wrestlers soon ? Austin ? Tell him to his face he isn't 6'2, dare ya.
cantstop25 said on 12/Oct/06
I know this is a bad pic, but you should still be able to see that trips did not tower over austin THAT much
Click Here
I know this is a bad pic, but you should still be able to see that trips did not tower over austin THAT much
Click Here
Alex said on 12/Oct/06
Cantstop, HHH had more than an inch on Austin. May not be 2 inches on him but it was around 1.5 inches at least.
Cantstop, HHH had more than an inch on Austin. May not be 2 inches on him but it was around 1.5 inches at least.
Viper652 said on 12/Oct/06
JK, Austin is clearly shorter than Triple H.
JK, Austin is clearly shorter than Triple H.
Alex said on 12/Oct/06
I'd give Austin 6'0. He really hasn't looked under 6'0 to me in any pictures.
JT, I am not sure if HHH wears lifts or not. I do think he's 6'1.5-6'2 barefoot and just is 6'3 or a bit more in wrestling boots.
I'd give Austin 6'0. He really hasn't looked under 6'0 to me in any pictures.
JT, I am not sure if HHH wears lifts or not. I do think he's 6'1.5-6'2 barefoot and just is 6'3 or a bit more in wrestling boots.
Frank said on 12/Oct/06
I would say Austin is 6ft to 6 ft .5 at best he was shorter than Vince who is about 6ft 1 .5 to 6ft 2
I would say Austin is 6ft to 6 ft .5 at best he was shorter than Vince who is about 6ft 1 .5 to 6ft 2
JK said on 12/Oct/06
Cantstop dont listen to Danimal, if you think Austin is 6'1.5'' then thats good coz thats what you think, I think he is 6'2'' and so is HHH
Cantstop dont listen to Danimal, if you think Austin is 6'1.5'' then thats good coz thats what you think, I think he is 6'2'' and so is HHH
Danimal said on 12/Oct/06
Cantstop, I still can't believe after being on this site for as long as you have, you still believe that Austin is 6'1.5". I mean come on man. NO ONE other than the newbies thinks that anymore. He's under 6'0" and it's been proven time and time again.
Cantstop, I still can't believe after being on this site for as long as you have, you still believe that Austin is 6'1.5". I mean come on man. NO ONE other than the newbies thinks that anymore. He's under 6'0" and it's been proven time and time again.
Dkko said on 11/Oct/06
Excuse me people but isn't this pagededicated exclusively to discuss Wight's height? I can't understand why are you discussing Austin's Hogan's and Levesque's heights, sure all of them are big and tall men, but this page is dedicated to a GIANT and not just tall men, but please compare Show with Rodman, O Neil or other notable giants, but PLEASE don't compare Paul Wight with people he has at least a head or more in height advantage
Excuse me people but isn't this pagededicated exclusively to discuss Wight's height? I can't understand why are you discussing Austin's Hogan's and Levesque's heights, sure all of them are big and tall men, but this page is dedicated to a GIANT and not just tall men, but please compare Show with Rodman, O Neil or other notable giants, but PLEASE don't compare Paul Wight with people he has at least a head or more in height advantage
cantstop25 said on 11/Oct/06
o well if he wears lifts tehn i guess he would be shorter, but I still dont think he is as low as 6'1", prob mroe 6'1.5"-6'2"
o well if he wears lifts tehn i guess he would be shorter, but I still dont think he is as low as 6'1", prob mroe 6'1.5"-6'2"
Frank said on 11/Oct/06
Triple H is 6ft 1 but wears lifts to appear 6ft 3 at times
Triple H is 6ft 1 but wears lifts to appear 6ft 3 at times
cantstop25 said on 11/Oct/06
jk, triple h is taller then austin, I would say 6'1.5" and 6'2.5" respectively
jk, triple h is taller then austin, I would say 6'1.5" and 6'2.5" respectively
JK said on 11/Oct/06
To me triple H and Austin are both 6'2'', but thats just me
To me triple H and Austin are both 6'2'', but thats just me
Danimal said on 11/Oct/06
JT, picture this: Hogan was taller than Hilbilly Jim in the 80's. Look how Hilbilly dwarfs that 5'11" dude. NOW, Hogan's own daughter is 5'11" or even shorter and he isn't THAT much taller than her. Just picture what he would have looked like next to his daughter at his peak height?
JT, picture this: Hogan was taller than Hilbilly Jim in the 80's. Look how Hilbilly dwarfs that 5'11" dude. NOW, Hogan's own daughter is 5'11" or even shorter and he isn't THAT much taller than her. Just picture what he would have looked like next to his daughter at his peak height?
Alex said on 10/Oct/06
I'd say Austin is 6'0 and HHH 6'1.5.
I'd say Austin is 6'0 and HHH 6'1.5.
Viper652 said on 10/Oct/06
Carter seems like the type of guy who beleives anything in print.
Carter seems like the type of guy who beleives anything in print.
Viper652 said on 10/Oct/06
Carter, you overestimate everyone on this site. Why is that?
Carter, you overestimate everyone on this site. Why is that?
Danimal said on 9/Oct/06
HHH is about 6'1.25" and Austin is about 5'11.5"-5'11.75".
HHH is about 6'1.25" and Austin is about 5'11.5"-5'11.75".
Carter_MVP said on 9/Oct/06
no offense Viper, but i've seen some of your other posts and the same goes here. U downgrade every1 to a height where there's no chance they r at. If u think HHH is 6-1 you're a fool and Austin is not 5'11. I've been watching these gusy for years and years, they tower over the majority of pple, especialyl HHH, 6'1 is tall but at 6'3 (whihc is the shortest he can possibly be) or 6'4 u r always distinctly taller than every1 else which he is.
no offense Viper, but i've seen some of your other posts and the same goes here. U downgrade every1 to a height where there's no chance they r at. If u think HHH is 6-1 you're a fool and Austin is not 5'11. I've been watching these gusy for years and years, they tower over the majority of pple, especialyl HHH, 6'1 is tall but at 6'3 (whihc is the shortest he can possibly be) or 6'4 u r always distinctly taller than every1 else which he is.
Viper652 said on 9/Oct/06
Triple H is more 6-1 and Austin between 5-11 and 6-0.
Triple H is more 6-1 and Austin between 5-11 and 6-0.
Big Show said on 9/Oct/06
Dkko, I'm guessing you're a newcomer to this site, but HHH sure as hell isn't 6'4 or even close. A year ago he got a picture taken together with legit 6'5 Ben Roethlisberger and he had HHH by at least 3 inches. Most of the wrestling heights are exagerrated you know. Not many wrestlers are being billed at their real height.
Dkko, I'm guessing you're a newcomer to this site, but HHH sure as hell isn't 6'4 or even close. A year ago he got a picture taken together with legit 6'5 Ben Roethlisberger and he had HHH by at least 3 inches. Most of the wrestling heights are exagerrated you know. Not many wrestlers are being billed at their real height.
Dkko said on 6/Oct/06
Show, Triple H at 6'2??!!! What the hell have you been drinking my man? HHH is no shorter than 6'4, remember when he was teaming/feuding with Stone Cold? Austin is every bit of 6'2 and HHH easily had 2 or 3 inches over him, also I watched both Conan episodes with the Giant and the Big Show and clearly when he appeared as the giant he looked a little taller, Big Show currently as big and tall as he may be is no close to the height he had during his days in WCW I remember he actually made Tony Schiavonne look like a toy during one interview
Show, Triple H at 6'2??!!! What the hell have you been drinking my man? HHH is no shorter than 6'4, remember when he was teaming/feuding with Stone Cold? Austin is every bit of 6'2 and HHH easily had 2 or 3 inches over him, also I watched both Conan episodes with the Giant and the Big Show and clearly when he appeared as the giant he looked a little taller, Big Show currently as big and tall as he may be is no close to the height he had during his days in WCW I remember he actually made Tony Schiavonne look like a toy during one interview
Alex said on 6/Oct/06
I think Big Show could be 7'0. I can't see the guy under 6'11. Maybe he could be just shy of 7'0. The pictures with Khali show that he really can't be under the 6'10 mark.
I think Big Show could be 7'0. I can't see the guy under 6'11. Maybe he could be just shy of 7'0. The pictures with Khali show that he really can't be under the 6'10 mark.
Viper652 said on 6/Oct/06
More like 6-10 1/2 - 6-11 Max.
More like 6-10 1/2 - 6-11 Max.
cdk said on 6/Oct/06
Big Show is the same height now as he was in his WCW days. Because he has gained weight and wears knee pads and taller boots now its makes his body appear shorter. His hair is now shaved too so that may make him look an inch or two shorter than he did in say 1998. Big Show is legit 7'0" that is fact.
Big Show is the same height now as he was in his WCW days. Because he has gained weight and wears knee pads and taller boots now its makes his body appear shorter. His hair is now shaved too so that may make him look an inch or two shorter than he did in say 1998. Big Show is legit 7'0" that is fact.
Viper652 said on 6/Oct/06
He only looked 6-7 one time on Conan. Conan's show is terrible to judge anyway.
He only looked 6-7 one time on Conan. Conan's show is terrible to judge anyway.
JT said on 6/Oct/06
Anonymous, I think Big Show was already in the WWE when this photo was taken of him and Conan (Click Here). Not quite a foot difference but around 9 inches or so.
Anonymous, I think Big Show was already in the WWE when this photo was taken of him and Conan (Click Here). Not quite a foot difference but around 9 inches or so.
Anonymous said on 6/Oct/06
does anybody remember the time he was on conan? this was back when he had long hair, he was probably in the wcw at the time as the giant. Well he came in he shook conans hand and they stood side by side, and he literally looked nearly a foot taller then the 6'4" Conan! It amazing how tall this man can look with good posture.
does anybody remember the time he was on conan? this was back when he had long hair, he was probably in the wcw at the time as the giant. Well he came in he shook conans hand and they stood side by side, and he literally looked nearly a foot taller then the 6'4" Conan! It amazing how tall this man can look with good posture.
Big Show said on 5/Oct/06
Dkko, are you confusing Big Show with someone else? Kane looked taller than Big Show? Yeah maybe if Kane was standing on a ladder, but otherwise? When they were a tag-team Big Show looked 4-5 inches taller, which was funny as they were both listed as 7 foot.
You think Big Show is 6'9.5 and Triple H is only 3 inches smaller (6'6.5). Maybe it's time to see an eye doctor. Triple H is 6'2 at best. To me Big Show still looks a solid 6'11 to 7 foot.
Dkko, are you confusing Big Show with someone else? Kane looked taller than Big Show? Yeah maybe if Kane was standing on a ladder, but otherwise? When they were a tag-team Big Show looked 4-5 inches taller, which was funny as they were both listed as 7 foot.
You think Big Show is 6'9.5 and Triple H is only 3 inches smaller (6'6.5). Maybe it's time to see an eye doctor. Triple H is 6'2 at best. To me Big Show still looks a solid 6'11 to 7 foot.
Rocker said on 4/Oct/06
Yeah Nash is classic should have a page back
Yeah Nash is classic should have a page back
Cantstop25 said on 4/Oct/06
yesh nashs page should be brought back his height would be discussed probably more then most of the wrestlers one this site excluding show, kane and taker. especially luger and viscera
yesh nashs page should be brought back his height would be discussed probably more then most of the wrestlers one this site excluding show, kane and taker. especially luger and viscera
Dkko said on 3/Oct/06
it is very clear that Big Show is now much shorter since he was a rookie in WCW, the WCW Giant was easily taller than Khali, remember how Nash actually had to be on his toes in order to stare at the Giant when he was mocking him in WCW?
Now even Kane looked taller than Show, I also remember how he dwarfed HHH when he debuted in the WWE in 1999, now I don't think there are more than 3 inches between the two I think Big Show nowadays stands about 6'9 1/2
it is very clear that Big Show is now much shorter since he was a rookie in WCW, the WCW Giant was easily taller than Khali, remember how Nash actually had to be on his toes in order to stare at the Giant when he was mocking him in WCW?
Now even Kane looked taller than Show, I also remember how he dwarfed HHH when he debuted in the WWE in 1999, now I don't think there are more than 3 inches between the two I think Big Show nowadays stands about 6'9 1/2
Alex said on 3/Oct/06
Rob, are you going to bring back the Kevin Nash page?
Rob, are you going to bring back the Kevin Nash page?
Alex said on 3/Oct/06
What would Nash's weight to today I wonder. At least 300-305lbs I'd assume.
What would Nash's weight to today I wonder. At least 300-305lbs I'd assume.
Danimal said on 3/Oct/06
Nash's weight fluctuated from 317-337 Alex.
Nash's weight fluctuated from 317-337 Alex.
Big Show said on 2/Oct/06
Nash also looked 6'9 (minimum) next to Magic Johnson (listed 6'9, actual height no less than 6'7) and Oliver Miller (6'8).
btw. Big Show looked 7'next to Rodman, because he totally dwarfed him.
Nash also looked 6'9 (minimum) next to Magic Johnson (listed 6'9, actual height no less than 6'7) and Oliver Miller (6'8).
btw. Big Show looked 7'next to Rodman, because he totally dwarfed him.
Viper652 said on 2/Oct/06
Nash only looked 6-8 next to 6-6 Dennis Rodman.
Nash only looked 6-8 next to 6-6 Dennis Rodman.
Alex said on 1/Oct/06
Nash weighed 340lbs? He looked 320 something to me.
Nash weighed 340lbs? He looked 320 something to me.
Alex said on 1/Oct/06
Danimal, Big Show is still very strong. That picture with Molly Sims appears to be in late 1999.
Danimal, Big Show is still very strong. That picture with Molly Sims appears to be in late 1999.
JT said on 30/Sep/06
Good picture Cantstop25. Lucky Big Show. If she's really 5'9", Big Show's around 21 inches taller in his boots, or 7'6". If she's really only 5'6", Big Show's about 19.5 inches taller in his boots, or around 7'1.5". Let's assume for the benefit of a few here on this website that Big Show's really 6'9.5" in his boots. This Victoria Secret and runway model would have to be a little under 5'3".
Good picture Cantstop25. Lucky Big Show. If she's really 5'9", Big Show's around 21 inches taller in his boots, or 7'6". If she's really only 5'6", Big Show's about 19.5 inches taller in his boots, or around 7'1.5". Let's assume for the benefit of a few here on this website that Big Show's really 6'9.5" in his boots. This Victoria Secret and runway model would have to be a little under 5'3".
Alex said on 30/Sep/06
Can't stop, decent picture as I saw that picture a couple years ago but its not the best since she's off the ground but you can see its def over a foot in height difference and she's 5'9 I read mostly, or could be 5'9.5 like you said.
Can't stop, decent picture as I saw that picture a couple years ago but its not the best since she's off the ground but you can see its def over a foot in height difference and she's 5'9 I read mostly, or could be 5'9.5 like you said.
Mr. E said on 30/Sep/06
I think this still has height value for both Show and Nash for evidence of 7'0" and 6'10"
Click Here
I think this still has height value for both Show and Nash for evidence of 7'0" and 6'10"
Click Here
Mr. E said on 29/Sep/06
I would saw now that Nash is close to 50, he's probably 6'9", at his peak 6'10". I'd still have to give Show 7'0" judging from thye 90's. Perhaps weight may have taken it's toll, he was never as heavy early in his career, much like Andre. Those early shots of Andre make him loo slim and tall, it's crazy. But late in career when he taged with Baba it was obvious that 7'4" or even billed 7'5" was way off base.
I would saw now that Nash is close to 50, he's probably 6'9", at his peak 6'10". I'd still have to give Show 7'0" judging from thye 90's. Perhaps weight may have taken it's toll, he was never as heavy early in his career, much like Andre. Those early shots of Andre make him loo slim and tall, it's crazy. But late in career when he taged with Baba it was obvious that 7'4" or even billed 7'5" was way off base.
Alex said on 29/Sep/06
I can't see Nash under 6'9 IMO. He has appeared to lost a bit of height.
I can't see Nash under 6'9 IMO. He has appeared to lost a bit of height.
Danimal said on 29/Sep/06
Shoot, Molly Sims is my height and the Younger Big Show was gigantic next to her. He's REALLY strong. He used to press Nash over his head in the WCW and Nash was between 315 and 340 pounds.
Shoot, Molly Sims is my height and the Younger Big Show was gigantic next to her. He's REALLY strong. He used to press Nash over his head in the WCW and Nash was between 315 and 340 pounds.
Danimal said on 29/Sep/06
Viper, if Nash was 6'8", then Taker would have been 6'6" MAX and Syd even less. I don't see him under 6'9".
Viper, if Nash was 6'8", then Taker would have been 6'6" MAX and Syd even less. I don't see him under 6'9".
Viper652 said on 29/Sep/06
I think Nash is closer to 6-8 in reality.
I think Nash is closer to 6-8 in reality.
mickey said on 29/Sep/06
listed 7ft does not mean is 7ft in real height.. most wrestler get their height listed a few inches taller is very common.. frankly to say big show was huge in size but not so huge in height.. he atually always apear to looks 6ft9~6ft10 in wwe if plp notice it..
listed 7ft does not mean is 7ft in real height.. most wrestler get their height listed a few inches taller is very common.. frankly to say big show was huge in size but not so huge in height.. he atually always apear to looks 6ft9~6ft10 in wwe if plp notice it..
Mr. E said on 29/Sep/06
Seeing the Nash-Big Show staredown, it is safe to say that Show had 2" on Nash. (Of course, Nash probably did that on purpose because WCW billed him as 7' and Show at 7'4") Nash at the time was 6'10" which leads to Show a legit 7'. Evidence points to Khali being 7'1".
Seeing the Nash-Big Show staredown, it is safe to say that Show had 2" on Nash. (Of course, Nash probably did that on purpose because WCW billed him as 7' and Show at 7'4") Nash at the time was 6'10" which leads to Show a legit 7'. Evidence points to Khali being 7'1".
Rocker said on 29/Sep/06
Big show is billed at 6'11 MAX in barefeet nearer 6'10
Big show is billed at 6'11 MAX in barefeet nearer 6'10
cantstop25 said on 28/Sep/06
"Kali is taller and was measured at 6-11 1/2."
and when was this?
"Kali is taller and was measured at 6-11 1/2."
and when was this?
Big Show said on 28/Sep/06
Viper, Khali was listed as 6'11.5 in a Indian bodybuilding magazine. It's never been confirmed that he was officially measured at this height.
I don't no much about India's measurements, but do they use feet and inches or do they use the metric system. For all I now this is just a height listing just like many others. None of them are confirmed, except the 7'2 listing, which Singh claims to be.
Viper, Khali was listed as 6'11.5 in a Indian bodybuilding magazine. It's never been confirmed that he was officially measured at this height.
I don't no much about India's measurements, but do they use feet and inches or do they use the metric system. For all I now this is just a height listing just like many others. None of them are confirmed, except the 7'2 listing, which Singh claims to be.
Danimal said on 28/Sep/06
I give Big Show 6'10.5"-6'11" at most.
I give Big Show 6'10.5"-6'11" at most.
Viper652 said on 28/Sep/06
He cant be 7-0 JK. Kali is taller and was measured at 6-11 1/2.
He cant be 7-0 JK. Kali is taller and was measured at 6-11 1/2.
JK said on 27/Sep/06
The guy is 7ft, it was amazing when John Cena FU'd such a big guy, how did he do that??
The guy is 7ft, it was amazing when John Cena FU'd such a big guy, how did he do that??
Viper652 said on 26/Sep/06
Kali is no taller than 6-11 1/2.
Kali is no taller than 6-11 1/2.
Alex said on 25/Sep/06
Viper it depends on how tall you think Khali is.
Viper it depends on how tall you think Khali is.
Viper652 said on 25/Sep/06
Big Show is no taller than 6-10 1/2 then.
Big Show is no taller than 6-10 1/2 then.
Big Show said on 25/Sep/06
Indeed Canstop25, if you check the ppv The Great American Bash, prior to the Punjabi Prison Match, Big Show and Khali beat up The Undertaker. After that they walk side by side through a hallway and they are the exact same height.
At first I've always thought that Khali was taller, but after seeing that footage (and it was the first good footage where the two were standing side by side) I'm convinced that the height difference between the two is minimal. Certainly not 1.5 - 2 inches. If any, it's more like 0.5 - 1 inch.
Indeed Canstop25, if you check the ppv The Great American Bash, prior to the Punjabi Prison Match, Big Show and Khali beat up The Undertaker. After that they walk side by side through a hallway and they are the exact same height.
At first I've always thought that Khali was taller, but after seeing that footage (and it was the first good footage where the two were standing side by side) I'm convinced that the height difference between the two is minimal. Certainly not 1.5 - 2 inches. If any, it's more like 0.5 - 1 inch.
Cantstop25 said on 24/Sep/06
You guys need to realize that the staredown khali was stadnign up much more straight then show. I think they are trying to pass off show as the biggest and Khali as the tallest. The other two or three times show and khali were together they appeared to be the same height.
You guys need to realize that the staredown khali was stadnign up much more straight then show. I think they are trying to pass off show as the biggest and Khali as the tallest. The other two or three times show and khali were together they appeared to be the same height.
Alex said on 24/Sep/06
We know Khali was measured at 6'11.5 so he can't be any lower than that really. But we've seen 7'1 measurements of him too. So if he's 6'11.5 and Big Show was as much as 1.5 inches shorter then Big Show can't be under 6'10. I think its Big Show 7'0 and Khali 7'1.
We know Khali was measured at 6'11.5 so he can't be any lower than that really. But we've seen 7'1 measurements of him too. So if he's 6'11.5 and Big Show was as much as 1.5 inches shorter then Big Show can't be under 6'10. I think its Big Show 7'0 and Khali 7'1.
Paul said on 24/Sep/06
I think 7'0 and 7'1 1/2 for Khali.
I think 7'0 and 7'1 1/2 for Khali.
Alex said on 23/Sep/06
Whatever Khali is Big Show is an inch shorter. 1.5 inches shorter at the very most. Their shoes looked very similar. Big Show's were maybe 1/2 more but maybe Khali had something in his boots that we didn't see. can't always go by that outside.
Whatever Khali is Big Show is an inch shorter. 1.5 inches shorter at the very most. Their shoes looked very similar. Big Show's were maybe 1/2 more but maybe Khali had something in his boots that we didn't see. can't always go by that outside.
JK said on 23/Sep/06
I think he is 7'0'' nothing over that
I think he is 7'0'' nothing over that
Jordan said on 23/Sep/06
Big SHow can look 6'8 at times becasue of his massive stomach. He cant be that short. Maybe 6'10 at the lowest.
Big SHow can look 6'8 at times becasue of his massive stomach. He cant be that short. Maybe 6'10 at the lowest.
topdweeb26 said on 23/Sep/06
When we had the pics of Big Show and Khali up, Khali's soles were about 1/2 as thick as the Big Show's. So say Big Show is 6' 8 then those lifts looked to give him about 1" to 1-1/2"... I'll go with 1-1/2" just to play the worst case scenario. But this would put Big Show at 6' 9-1/2" (if he is 6' 8 in barefeet). And Khali's shoes looked to be 1/2 as thick, so 3/4" of an inch, and if he is 6'11 barefeet, then that would put him at 6' 11-3/4". That's would put Khali at 2-1/4 inches taller than the Big Show, and that would leave about 1 1/4 inches unaccounted for (in the worst case scenario, at times they look dead even to me). There's no way Big Show is just 6' 8 in barefeet, even if Khali is 6' 11.
And I remember before their face off, Jason said Khali would have several inches on Show, but that didn't happen at all. And yes, WWE would want Khali to tower over Show, because 1. They have Khali billed at 7' 3 and Show at 7'. 2. In a WWE magazine a couples months ago, they had a poster showing the height of the wrestlers, and it had Khali looking a lot taller to the Big Show than he does in real life. And 3. Because when they met up, WWE.com conveniently only show pics of Khali and Big Show at VERY extreme angles that made the Big Show look like he was dwarfed to Khali. So I don't buy into this crap of, "Oh well they made the Big Show wear lifts because they don't want Khali to be that much taller than him".
When we had the pics of Big Show and Khali up, Khali's soles were about 1/2 as thick as the Big Show's. So say Big Show is 6' 8 then those lifts looked to give him about 1" to 1-1/2"... I'll go with 1-1/2" just to play the worst case scenario. But this would put Big Show at 6' 9-1/2" (if he is 6' 8 in barefeet). And Khali's shoes looked to be 1/2 as thick, so 3/4" of an inch, and if he is 6'11 barefeet, then that would put him at 6' 11-3/4". That's would put Khali at 2-1/4 inches taller than the Big Show, and that would leave about 1 1/4 inches unaccounted for (in the worst case scenario, at times they look dead even to me). There's no way Big Show is just 6' 8 in barefeet, even if Khali is 6' 11.
And I remember before their face off, Jason said Khali would have several inches on Show, but that didn't happen at all. And yes, WWE would want Khali to tower over Show, because 1. They have Khali billed at 7' 3 and Show at 7'. 2. In a WWE magazine a couples months ago, they had a poster showing the height of the wrestlers, and it had Khali looking a lot taller to the Big Show than he does in real life. And 3. Because when they met up, WWE.com conveniently only show pics of Khali and Big Show at VERY extreme angles that made the Big Show look like he was dwarfed to Khali. So I don't buy into this crap of, "Oh well they made the Big Show wear lifts because they don't want Khali to be that much taller than him".
Big Show said on 23/Sep/06
Viper, look at it this way, if Big Show is 6'8, than Kane is 6'3-6'4 at best and Hogan would be 6'1 at best. Akebono would be 6'3-6'4 and Lesnar 5'10-5'11. To me there's too much evidence to contradict this. So far Jason hasn't really showed us any evidence to back up his theory. But we have been showing enough evidence to put Big Show at around 7'.
Viper, look at it this way, if Big Show is 6'8, than Kane is 6'3-6'4 at best and Hogan would be 6'1 at best. Akebono would be 6'3-6'4 and Lesnar 5'10-5'11. To me there's too much evidence to contradict this. So far Jason hasn't really showed us any evidence to back up his theory. But we have been showing enough evidence to put Big Show at around 7'.
Alex said on 22/Sep/06
Paul, I can one of them the FU (John Cena's finisher)and done it to him 5-6 times over the last 2-3 summers. The other guy I can get it on too I think but he hasn't let me try it on him yet.
Paul, I can one of them the FU (John Cena's finisher)and done it to him 5-6 times over the last 2-3 summers. The other guy I can get it on too I think but he hasn't let me try it on him yet.
Rocker said on 22/Sep/06
Big Show max is 7ft,when he was barefoot in a match he was nearer 6ft10
Big Show max is 7ft,when he was barefoot in a match he was nearer 6ft10
Paul said on 22/Sep/06
Yes Alex I saw that....big guys.
Yes Alex I saw that....big guys.
Alex said on 21/Sep/06
Paul, you did see a picture of them both I posted sometime back right?
Paul, you did see a picture of them both I posted sometime back right?
Alex said on 21/Sep/06
Viper, I don't think Big Show is 6'8 at all. Not just saying that because I am a big fan of his as a wrestler, but I do think the man is 7'0. At lowest 6'11 but no less than that. You have to see these guys in person sometimes to get a real estimate as on TV they can sometimes even look shorter than in real life.
Viper, I don't think Big Show is 6'8 at all. Not just saying that because I am a big fan of his as a wrestler, but I do think the man is 7'0. At lowest 6'11 but no less than that. You have to see these guys in person sometimes to get a real estimate as on TV they can sometimes even look shorter than in real life.
Paul said on 21/Sep/06
Never mind Alex. If it does happen put it on youtube lol. Lochness (Haystacks) can now be found on youtube having a match with Big Daddy with a whole belly full of trouble ensuing....
Never mind Alex. If it does happen put it on youtube lol. Lochness (Haystacks) can now be found on youtube having a match with Big Daddy with a whole belly full of trouble ensuing....
Richard said on 20/Sep/06
To me it looked like 1.5 to 2 inches between Singh and Big Show.
To me it looked like 1.5 to 2 inches between Singh and Big Show.
Viper652 said on 20/Sep/06
Alex, do you think there is any possible way Big Show is 6-8? Im pretty torn about it. The guy seems 6-10 1/2-6-11 or even taller at times. I dont know, Jason might fully convince me otherwise :)
Alex, do you think there is any possible way Big Show is 6-8? Im pretty torn about it. The guy seems 6-10 1/2-6-11 or even taller at times. I dont know, Jason might fully convince me otherwise :)
Alex said on 19/Sep/06
Paul, It never happened yet. lol
Both I don't think would agree to it. I bet they'd rather just have a regular wrestling match.
Paul, It never happened yet. lol
Both I don't think would agree to it. I bet they'd rather just have a regular wrestling match.
Jason said on 19/Sep/06
My .02 about Big Show & Dalip going head to head? I think Khali is 6'11'' and Big Show only appeared about 1 inch shorter, but it also looked like he was wearing lifts to me. If Big Show actually were a few inches below Khali, I don't think WWE would have them out there with Khali looming inches above him. We've seen from the variety of heights Big Show appears that he's an occasional lift wearer whatever your opinion is of his height.
Paul, regarding JBL, I didn't mean that in a bad way. Honest. :)
My .02 about Big Show & Dalip going head to head? I think Khali is 6'11'' and Big Show only appeared about 1 inch shorter, but it also looked like he was wearing lifts to me. If Big Show actually were a few inches below Khali, I don't think WWE would have them out there with Khali looming inches above him. We've seen from the variety of heights Big Show appears that he's an occasional lift wearer whatever your opinion is of his height.
Paul, regarding JBL, I didn't mean that in a bad way. Honest. :)
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.
