Sid is bigger. But I wouldnt say he completely dwarfs Hogan. I think Hogan is closer to Sid in size, than Brock is to Hogan TBF.
Hogan bloated as hell post 82. That Rumble picture really highlights the hgh belly. 1988-89 was peak Hogan hgh belly. Look like a pregnant woman lol
Hogan succeeded because he was a unique being, an anomaly. And I say that as someone who was not a huge fan. Big guys also tend to be one note and sort of one dimensional bruisers and bland. He not only sold a lot in matches for a big guy but he was so charismatic for a big guy. And for a good guy super-hero, most often than not, he was fighting like a heel(fingers in the eyes, always on offense, etc...). It should not make it sense but it did.One of the reasons Hogan was as great as he was. To be as big as he was and sell the way he sold, thus gaining sympathy from the majority of a fanbase throughout multiple eras was, quite frankly, brilliant.
He had altered his training methods, so to speak from 2000 onward based on visual evidence.One of Hulk’s best physiques was near the end of his full-time run. He was yoked in 2002 and THAT’S A FACT, JACK!
48-49 years old, BROTHER!
Hogan is actually slimmed down here too compared to the 80s. He usually held a lot of water weight and had a fuller, more bloated look. He was jacked with a lower body fat here, similar to his Hollywood Hogan look in the 90s. Maybe he used diuretics and was more strict with his diet here.He had altered his training methods, so to speak from 2000 onward based on visual evidence.
Hogan slimmed down tremendously, starting in the second half of 1991 and extending to 1993, and from that point he remained very lean throughout his nWo run. However by 2000 he had gained a significant amount of muscle mass back and looked much, much closer to his Golden Era physique. If he did change supplements, it might have been in light of the fact that the script had flipped by 2000 and now almost everyone was jacked up in the WWE and WCW.
Hogan was 6'3" at his peak. This site claims he's now 6'3" but I'm not sure if he's even that tall at this point.
Obvious typo, I meant 6'6" as guesstimated in celebheights.I’m 6”1 and there is no shot Hulk Hogan in the 80s was only 2 inches taller than me lol.
My guess was that Hogan at his peak was around 6”5, maybe close to 6”6. That is before the additional height he got from wearing boots.
Jesus christ, Brock looks like a monster bere.There's two ways to answer this. One in the absolute sense, and another in the relative one.
1. Hogan is absolutely bigger in that he is over four inches taller than him, and so he'd carry a bigger bone frame. So yes, Hogan is bigger.......However.....
2. Brock is bigger relative to his respective height since he fills his bone frame out with more muscle than Hogan did at his peak.
See below. Brock in 2003 had a much fuller chest, bigger side delts (shoulders), bigger traps (neck/shoulders) and most definitely a much wider back than Hogan.
Also below is Hogan from 1988, which is about his peak. He's clearly not as 'full' as Brock in multiple muscle groups.