|
Learner
Jun 5, 2011, 6:49 PM
Post #1 of 18
(25570 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
What is Chris Sharma's current height and weight? Also, please state your source(s).
I'm just curious, and I've gotten a lot of mixed results while surfing the internet. People claim his height is anywhere from 5'10" to 6'0" and his weight is anywhere from 160 to 176. To make things more interesting, in Best of the West (filmed in 2006) when he's talking about the Hueco bouldering area Chris himself says something like "I came here before as a scrony 120 pound kid. Now I come back at 150..."
I'm hoping that what can differentiate this discussion from the others is that in this one, posters will state their sources.
(This post was edited by Learner on Jun 5, 2011, 6:51 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
squierbypetzl
Moderator
Jun 6, 2011, 12:58 AM
Post #2 of 18
(25451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 3431
|
Dunno why you'd care. From the time I saw Sharma at a comp I'd say he's 6ft tall, no idea what he weighs but he looks heavier set than Dave Graham or Dani Andrade. He eats like a horse too.
|
|
|
|
|
squierbypetzl
Moderator
Jun 6, 2011, 1:13 AM
Post #4 of 18
(25424 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 3431
|
Actually, I do remember. Basically it was a big greasy ham+chicken+tomatoe+3 cheese? sandwich (say 8"x5"x4") from a street vendor...
He spent a couple of days sick to his stomach.
|
|
|
|
|
Learner
Jun 6, 2011, 1:19 AM
Post #5 of 18
(25415 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
squierbypetzl wrote: Actually, I do remember. Basically it was a big greasy ham+chicken+tomatoe+3 cheese? sandwich (say 8"x5"x4") from a street vendor... He spent a couple of days sick to his stomach.
 Thanks for sharing!
...and what do you think he weighed? (Before and after the sandwich, please.)
(This post was edited by Learner on Jun 6, 2011, 1:20 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
squierbypetzl
Moderator
Jun 6, 2011, 1:26 AM
Post #6 of 18
(25402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 3431
|
Go on 8.nu and ask one of his exes?
|
|
|
|
|
matterunomama
Jun 6, 2011, 11:06 PM
Post #7 of 18
(25205 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 419
|
I would say 6 feet (source: personal observation). I would say weight is just right (avid personal observation).
NIIIIce lookin' boy. (personal opinion)
|
|
|
|
|
rtwilli4
Jun 6, 2011, 11:24 PM
Post #8 of 18
(25197 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 1867
|
I'm 6ft 155 and he seemed bigger and taller than me. Maybe it's 'cuz his head is so big?
He'd definitely at least in the 170's... big guy compared to other 5.15 climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
rangerrob
Jun 13, 2011, 12:29 PM
Post #10 of 18
(24937 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641
|
This screams stalker to me
|
|
|
|
|
climber49er
Jun 13, 2011, 4:05 PM
Post #11 of 18
(24861 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2003
Posts: 1404
|
/me wonderz why u carez?
|
|
|
|
|
jh_angel
Jun 13, 2011, 4:44 PM
Post #12 of 18
(24839 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Posts: 232
|
rtwilli4 wrote: I'm 6ft 155 and he seemed bigger and taller than me. Maybe it's 'cuz his head is so big? He'd definitely at least in the 170's... big guy compared to other 5.15 climbers.
Yeah, I'm 6' and about 150, and he was noticeably taller than me. I'd guess about 6'2". Can't say for sure about the weight, but 170-180 seems like it'd be close.
|
|
|
|
|
flesh
Jun 15, 2011, 6:41 PM
Post #13 of 18
(24697 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 419
|
according to my friend who was competing with sharma at a comp 2 years ago and asked him his height weight. It is 6 foot 1 inch, weight fluctuates from 156-166
This seems accurate, almost all top climbers have very low body fat. ALso, with low body fat they look very cut/strong. Because of this they weigh less then it looks like. The guys at my gym don't believe me that i'm 6 0 154, because it looks like i have alot of muscle, but I have skinny legs and around 6% body fat.
One of my friends boulder v13 and he is 6 1, 158-163 lbs
|
|
|
|
|
Learner
Jun 15, 2011, 8:01 PM
Post #14 of 18
(24673 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
flesh wrote: according to my friend who was competing with sharma at a comp 2 years ago and asked him his height weight. It is 6 foot 1 inch, weight fluctuates from 156-166 This seems accurate, almost all top climbers have very low body fat. ALso, with low body fat they look very cut/strong. Because of this they weigh less then it looks like. The guys at my gym don't believe me that i'm 6 0 154, because it looks like i have alot of muscle, but I have skinny legs and around 6% body fat. One of my friends boulder v13 and he is 6 1, 158-163 lbs
If any of you are wondering why I asked this, at a gym I go to, there tends to be some discussion about different climbers' height, weight, reach, etc... People at the gym do realize that good climbers come in all different shapes and sizes (compare Adam Ondra to Chris Sharma, for example), that both physical and mental techique and skill are most important, and that when it comes to how much muscle to carry, it all depends on your pound-for-pound strength-to-muscle weight return relative to what is needed for climbing. Still, anthropometrics does frequently pop up as a topic. It usually comes up when someone fails to make a reach and blames their reach, or their anaerobic endurance tops out and they blame their weight, or a climber contemplates whether or not he/she needs to drop some weight and whether or not this would help their climbing, etc....
Apparently some climbers are interested in comparing their own height and weight to other climbers, despite realizing that you can succeed in any size/shape. Not surprising.
(This post was edited by Learner on Jun 15, 2011, 8:15 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
enigma
Jun 16, 2011, 9:59 AM
Post #15 of 18
(24575 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
Learner wrote: flesh wrote: according to my friend who was competing with sharma at a comp 2 years ago and asked him his height weight. It is 6 foot 1 inch, weight fluctuates from 156-166 This seems accurate, almost all top climbers have very low body fat. ALso, with low body fat they look very cut/strong. Because of this they weigh less then it looks like. The guys at my gym don't believe me that i'm 6 0 154, because it looks like i have alot of muscle, but I have skinny legs and around 6% body fat. One of my friends boulder v13 and he is 6 1, 158-163 lbs Good info, thanks! If any of you are wondering why I asked this, at a gym I go to, there tends to be some discussion about different climbers' height, weight, reach, etc... People at the gym do realize that good climbers come in all different shapes and sizes (compare Adam Ondra to Chris Sharma, for example), that both physical and mental techique and skill are most important, and that when it comes to how much muscle to carry, it all depends on your pound-for-pound strength-to-muscle weight return relative to what is needed for climbing. Still, anthropometrics does frequently pop up as a topic. It usually comes up when someone fails to make a reach and blames their reach, or their anaerobic endurance tops out and they blame their weight, or a climber contemplates whether or not he/she needs to drop some weight and whether or not this would help their climbing, etc.... Apparently some climbers are interested in comparing their own height and weight to other climbers, despite realizing that you can succeed in any size/shape. Not surprising.
However no one is mentioning any other physical details! 
|
|
|
|
|
Learner
Jun 16, 2011, 3:05 PM
Post #16 of 18
(24544 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
enigma wrote: Learner wrote: flesh wrote: according to my friend who was competing with sharma at a comp 2 years ago and asked him his height weight. It is 6 foot 1 inch, weight fluctuates from 156-166 This seems accurate, almost all top climbers have very low body fat. ALso, with low body fat they look very cut/strong. Because of this they weigh less then it looks like. The guys at my gym don't believe me that i'm 6 0 154, because it looks like i have alot of muscle, but I have skinny legs and around 6% body fat. One of my friends boulder v13 and he is 6 1, 158-163 lbs Good info, thanks! If any of you are wondering why I asked this, at a gym I go to, there tends to be some discussion about different climbers' height, weight, reach, etc... People at the gym do realize that good climbers come in all different shapes and sizes (compare Adam Ondra to Chris Sharma, for example), that both physical and mental techique and skill are most important, and that when it comes to how much muscle to carry, it all depends on your pound-for-pound strength-to-muscle weight return relative to what is needed for climbing. Still, anthropometrics does frequently pop up as a topic. It usually comes up when someone fails to make a reach and blames their reach, or their anaerobic endurance tops out and they blame their weight, or a climber contemplates whether or not he/she needs to drop some weight and whether or not this would help their climbing, etc.... Apparently some climbers are interested in comparing their own height and weight to other climbers, despite realizing that you can succeed in any size/shape. Not surprising. However no one is mentioning any other physical details! 
(This post was edited by Learner on Jun 16, 2011, 3:11 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
flesh
Jun 22, 2011, 12:43 AM
Post #18 of 18
(24313 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 419
|
aprice00 wrote: Learner wrote: You have a wide array of interests, you're pretty, and you climb hard. I think you're pretty sexy, enigma For posterity bahahahaha
seriously
|
|
|
|
|
|
