Goliath swats a shot near the top of the backboard (pic)

[CavaliersFTW]

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-a1ermWcdB0A/UYG0n9ODRVI/AAAAAAAAETY/hT4EQUWZ9kI/s800/david-jackson-wilt-chamberlain-kansas-university-jayhawks-1957.jpg

Back from his KU days...

[DuMa]

smh. not even close to the top of the backboard

[9erempiree]

It would be rarefied are if he was indeed an average height player. The man is like 7'3'', they use to underestimate height and weight back in the day.

If you look at his feet he's not very high it's his damn wing span.

[turnaroundJ]

yeah that's not anywhere near the top

[jzek]

McGee could do that easily.

[Trollsmasher]

Look at all those fat, 5'10 white guys. I would not be surprised if that rim was at 8'5:facepalm

[CavaliersFTW]

haters on full blast as usual when the subject of Wilt comes up :lol

[Andrew Wiggins]

why does wilt give you such a hard on?

[millwad]

1. No where near the top of the backboard
2. He barely jumps
3. The pic looks really odd, the white guy has his fingers on the backboard without jumping. Wilt without jumping would almost hit his head on the backboard and his head would be touching the net.

[millwad]

This must be a lowered rim, if Wilt wouldn't be jumping on this pic and only had his arm raised he would easily dunk without jumping.

[CavaliersFTW]

why does wilt give you such a hard on?
If by hard on you mean "why are you a fan?" - uh gee i dunno, why are there fans of MJ, why are there fans of Lebron, why are there fans of any great great player/athletes? Really dumb question.

[9erempiree]

This must be a lowered rim, if Wilt wouldn't be jumping on this pic and only had his arm raised he would easily dunk without jumping.

You never know because back in those days the rules of basketball were not official. The game was during it's growth stage and not official like it is now.

[sc19]

Lol. They playing with low rims. GTFO with that weak era shit.

[CavaliersFTW]

This must be a lowered rim, if Wilt wouldn't be jumping on this pic and only had his arm raised he would easily dunk without jumping.
Not so sure about that lol I think some of you guys try too hard to sell Wilt short - btw, have you heard? Your old pal JL is alive and well, and back on ISH :D

[Andrew Wiggins]

If by hard on you mean "why are you a fan?" - uh gee i dunno, why are there fans of MJ, why are there fans of Lebron, why are there fans of any great great player/athletes? Really dumb question.

fans of players usually grow up watching or are able to follow a player's career while he's active. i doubt you were old enough to watch him during his playing days. so did you became a fan of him through old highlights and reading myths about him?

[millwad]

Not so sure about that lol I think some of you guys try too hard to sell Wilt short - btw, have you heard? Your old pal JL is alive and well, and back on ISH :D

Seriously, without any bias.

You must admit that the pic looks very awkward, you're great with photo's, editing and video and if you somehow would be able to drag Wilt body down to the court you'd see that he would be way over the rim with his hands. You must see that by only looking as well. The rim is too low.

Compare that the pic in this thread with this one;

http://cache2.artprintimages.com/p/LRG/27/2778/2HNTD00Z/art-print/grey-villet-overbrook-highschool-basketball-team-wilt-the-stilt-chamberlain-touch-basket-at-regular-standing.jpg

And Jlauber, haha, really?
What's his new nickname?

[chosen_one6]

Angle creates the impression that he's almost near the top of the backboard but he's not.

[CavaliersFTW]

Seriously, without any bias.

You must admit that the pic looks very awkward, you're great with photo's, editing and video and if you somehow would be able to drag Wilt body down to the court you'd see that he would be way over the rim with his hands. You must see that by only looking as well. The rim is too low.

Compare that the pic in this thread with this one;

http://cache2.artprintimages.com/p/LRG/27/2778/2HNTD00Z/art-print/grey-villet-overbrook-highschool-basketball-team-wilt-the-stilt-chamberlain-touch-basket-at-regular-standing.jpg

And Jlauber, haha, really?
What's his new nickname?
I'm sorry I don't see what you see, and logically seeing as how it's an NCAA KU game (vs Marquette University in 1957) at Kansas University I don't think they for w/e reasons would lower their rims :oldlol: c'mon now. You can argue "angle" w/e, but the NCAA wasn't bushleague in the 50's the NCAA was arguably far more organized and popular than the NBA in the mid 50's. They didn't bend the rules to help Wilt, they bent the rules to stop him. JL now = Lazeruss. His old account must have been banned or something but he's back with the April 2013 crew :rockon:

[millwad]

I'm sorry I don't see what you see, and logically seeing as how it's an NCAA KU game (vs Marquette University in 1957) at Kansas University I don't think they for w/e reasons would lower their rims :oldlol: c'mon now. You can argue "angle" w/e, but the NCAA wasn't bushleague in the 50's the NCAA was arguably far more organized and popular than the NBA in the mid 50's. They didn't ever bend the rules to help Wilt, they bent the rules to stop him. JL now = Lazeruss. His old account must have been banned or something but he's back with the April 2013 crew :rockon:

I have no clue what type of game it is and I'm not trying to bash anyone.
Since you're saying that it's an NCAA game we can be sure that the angle is extremely misleading because just by looking you could see that Wilt would easily dunk the ball standing and that one white guy looks like he's touching the backboard without jumping.

Wilt was an amazing athlete and really tall but he wasn't that tall and he would never reach that high with a jump like that.

And haha, Jlauber... I checked some of "Lazeruss" posts and it's the same old arguments! :cheers:

[Xsatyr]

I'm sorry I don't see what you see, and logically seeing as how it's an NCAA KU game (vs Marquette University in 1957) at Kansas University I don't think they for w/e reasons would lower their rims :oldlol: c'mon now. You can argue "angle" w/e, but the NCAA wasn't bushleague in the 50's the NCAA was arguably far more organized and popular than the NBA in the mid 50's. They didn't bend the rules to help Wilt, they bent the rules to stop him. JL now = Lazeruss. His old account must have been banned or something but he's back with the April 2013 crew :rockon:

Stop posting, it's obvious to everyone else except you.

[Rake2204]

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-a1ermWcdB0A/UYG0n9ODRVI/AAAAAAAAETY/hT4EQUWZ9kI/s800/david-jackson-wilt-chamberlain-kansas-university-jayhawks-1957.jpg

Back from his KU days...As always, not to be difficult, but I feel like there's 3,452 other photos that don't rely on misleading angles and perspective that could have shown Wilt's incredible reach and athleticism (even a still shot from the past-his-prime All-Star block would have sufficed). Pauk used to try to play the same card with LeBron James. Both guys have tons of legitimate evidence showing how great of athletes they were (and how high they could jump) so I do not believe misleading pictures like this do a lot for the cause.

It's like trying to prove to people how high Shawn Kemp could jump by showing them this picture:

http://img498.imageshack.us/img498/5176/shawnkemp7jc.jpg

[9erempiree]

The problem with college basketball back in the days were that all rims were not the same height. Some were 9 feet, 9.5 feet or 10 feet, this was dependent on school.

The height of the basket could be different from one week to another. It was always raised and lowered for the student body to play. It's ideal to play on 10 foot but if the basket was lowered on Monday for class, then it may stay that way for a Tuesday game.

Class was more important than a basketball game.

[LikeABosh]

Playing against a bunch of porky white joe schmoe farm boys.

[chazzy]

....perspective

[fpliii]

OT: CavsFTW - Did you ever get ahold of the 73 Knicks-Lakers Finals game? It seems it was requested on davka, though nobody's responded (I just registered a couple of days ago, and will bump the request when my account gets forum permissions after 7 days). I feel like somebody definitely recorded it, so it's (hopefully) likely just a matter of time before it shows up.

[bmd]

I'm gonna call bullshit. I cropped him and just moved him down so that he's "standing" on the floor. There is no way he would be able to have his fingers up over the rim while standing on the floor and being bent over.

Either that rim is low as hell, or the angle of the photo makes it look like he's way higher than he is.

http://i39.tinypic.com/5fosiw.jpg

[Mrofir]

cavs ftw is a better poster than everyone who has responded combined.

I have no idea what you guys are talking about, but I did notice there is a small army of miniature helicopters carrying wilt, and at the same time there are dwarf monkeys in the background which cause all the other players to appear taller than they are. Those white guys are actually 4'11 max

[Mrofir]

I'm gonna call bullshit. I cropped him and just moved him down so that he's "standing" on the floor. There is no way he would be able to have his fingers up over the rim while standing on the floor and being bent over.

Either that rim is low as hell, or the angle of the photo makes it look like he's way higher than he is.

http://i39.tinypic.com/5fosiw.jpg

dude I appreciate the effort and have enjoyed your posts lately, but you cannot just drag the thing down and get an accurate representation of height vs the rim. Dude, the rim and wilt are different distances from the camera lens, and different angle too. Dude.

[9erempiree]

I'm gonna call bullshit. I cropped him and just moved him down so that he's "standing" on the floor. There is no way he would be able to have his fingers up over the rim while standing on the floor and being bent over.

Either that rim is low as hell, or the angle of the photo makes it look like he's way higher than he is.

http://i39.tinypic.com/5fosiw.jpg

rims were lowered.

[Mrofir]

rims were lowered.

yeah and if you notice, the rafters are also lowered, they are only about 2 ft above wilt's head. Dwarf monkeys. I'm tellin ya :facepalm

[Patrick Chewing]

Deceiving ass picture. He's way to the right of the basket in that shot. Hell, judging by where he is and where the hook shot is taken from, I wouldn't doubt if his hand wasn't even anywhere close to rim level.

[fpliii]

rims were lowered.

sup

OT: Any chance in your opinion that Boston becomes the first ever to come back from 0-3?

[Mrofir]

sup

OT: Any chance in your opinion that Boston becomes the first ever to come back from 0-3?


at this point, history would dictate they have about a 50% chance of winning the next game, and a less than 50% chance of winning game 7, if they get that far.

Any chance? Yes

[9erempiree]

sup

OT: Any chance in your opinion that Boston becomes the first ever to come back from 0-3?

I think so.

They seem like a tougher team mentally than Knicks.

[bmd]

dude I appreciate the effort and have enjoyed your posts lately, but you cannot just drag the thing down and get an accurate representation of height vs the rim. Dude, the rim and wilt are different distances from the camera lens, and different angle too. Dude.It depends on where Wilt is.

If he is right over the rim, like the OP is insinuating he is, then I can drag him right down and compare him to the rim.

By dragging him down I proved either the rim is very low (if Wilt is over the rim), or Wilt is well in front of the rim much closer the the camera creating the appearance that he is jumping much higher than he is.

[Rake2204]

dude I appreciate the effort and have enjoyed your posts lately, but you cannot just drag the thing down and get an accurate representation of height vs the rim. Dude, the rim and wilt are different distances from the camera lens, and different angle too. Dude.Yeah, I agree that doesn't seem to be the most accurate way to make a comparison. However, I still feel Wilt's reach in accordance to the backboard is so obviously distorted due to the photo angle and his position that this should not even be a discussion. As I said previously, there's ton of examples that'd better show Wilt's incredible ability. Using a low angle photo snapped at just the right time to make it look like Chamberlain's just casually touching the top of the backboard is not one of them.

In addition to the Kemp photo I posted earlier, here's another extreme example of angle distortion:

http://www.movesmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/wilt-chamberlain-ma-66.jpg

[9erempiree]

Either way the picture is deceiving as hell and for an expert on Wilt, like the OP, he should know better than to use that picture in this thread.

Wilt is actually between the rim and the player shooting. He's not all the way behind the rim, which would make it somewhat believable.

Since Wilt is in front of the rim and not behind it, I think it makes him higher than what he really was.

[bmd]

The thing I don't like about the OP is that he is always making these fantasy threads trying to make old players seem like gods among men. It's insulting to everybody to purposely try to deceive.

It is the reason I can never take any of the OP's threads seriously, because it's most likely sensationalized bull.

[9erempiree]

The thing I don't like about the OP is that he is always making these fantasy threads trying to make old players seem like gods among men. It's insulting to everybody to purposely try to deceive.

It is the reason I can never take any of the OP's threads seriously, because it's most likely sensationalized bull.

I don't have a problem with him making videos and finding old footages. He tries to pass off as a credible source, since he makes videos. I applaud him for that.

The problem is that he is using a distorted picture to try and lie to us that Wilt jumps that high.

Pretty much he either fvcked up by creating this thread -or- he really trying to lie to us.

Either way....:facepalm

[Mrofir]

I still think it's a cool pic, and I think it's universally accepted by scientists that Wilt was an athletic wiz whose pictures should be shared on basketball websites.

[LAZERUSS]

As always, not to be difficult, but I feel like there's 3,452 other photos that don't rely on misleading angles and perspective that could have shown Wilt's incredible reach and athleticism (even a still shot from the past-his-prime All-Star block would have sufficed). Pauk used to try to play the same card with LeBron James. Both guys have tons of legitimate evidence showing how great of athletes they were (and how high they could jump) so I do not believe misleading pictures like this do a lot for the cause.

It's like trying to prove to people how high Shawn Kemp could jump by showing them this picture:

http://img498.imageshack.us/img498/5176/shawnkemp7jc.jpg

Excellent post. :cheers:

The point being that, for years the naysayers would argue that since there was no footage that existed, or no bonafide first-hand eye-witness accounts, that these Wilt "myths" were simply untrue.

However, thanks to CavsFan, and other's, we now have video footage which clearly depicts a Wilt leap with his fingertips within a couple of inches from the top of the backboard (on a leap in which he had no time to react, without benefit of a running start, and going straight up.) And there is other footage of an old Chamberlain, at over 300 lbs, on a surgically repaired knee, and again without benefit of a running start, blocking a shot in a '71 playoff game, in which his fingertips are at the top of the square. And, as mentioned, a block in a late 60's all-star game, in which he is within inches of the top of the backboard.

There are probably many eye-witnesses to Wilt touching the top of the backboard, since it was common knowledge when he played, but in any case, Sonny Hill, a well-respected Philly sports icon, and Al Domenico, the longtime Sixer trainer, have both claimed to have witnessed such a feat.

There are KU newspaper accounts which have Wilt dunking on an experimental 12 ft. rim that rolled out by his coach.

There is an eye-witness account, by none other than Tex Winter, who claimed to have witnessed a high school Chamberlain (at less than 7-0) taking three steps and dunking from the FT line. He was so shocked that he lobbied to put a rule that was put in place which prevented such "freakish activity."

I am more amazed though, at those who don't believe it was possible. Here was a Wilt at over 7-1 (and there is a lot of debate at just how much over BTW), with a measured 7-8 wingpan, and who was winning college highjump championships (part-time and with very poor technique.) We know that Chamberlain had a standing reach in college, of 9'6", and there is some evidence which suggests that he was around 7-0 then, and probably grew at least an inch after that. Touching the top of the backboard, with just one out-stretched hand would probably require less than a 42" vertical.

How fast was Chamberlain? In his own biography, he claimed that in college, he ran a 4.4 40. BTW, he was a member of KU's 4x100 yard relay team, and obviously was an established sprinter. But before someon scoffs at that 4.4, we have the eye-witness clocking by none other than Chief's head coach Hank Stram, of a 27 year old Wilt, at over 290 lbs, running a 4.6 (and this was a Chamberlain whose last track events had occured some five-six years before that.) Of course, there is now video footage which shows a college Wilt running end-to-end in a game, and in it, he is just blowing by everyone.

How strong was Chamberlain? Well the internet has been plastered with accounts of Wilt benching 500+ lbs for years. Here again, the Wilt-bashers will ask for video evidence, in an era in which even his 100 point game was not filmed. But, we have many first-hand accounts of at least a Wilt with extraordinary strength, including one which claims that a 59 year old Wilt was benching 465 lbs. None other than Arnold Schwartzenegger, in a video interview, was stunned by just how strong Chamberlain was. In Robert Cherry's book on Wilt, he interviewed a well-known weight-lifter (his own words), in which a 6-5 250 lb man, who was known to have benched 500 lbs, claimed that Wilt was the strongest man he ever met.

And here again, the internet has page-after-page of descriptions of Wilt's staggering strength.

What is even more remarkable, however, is that here was a Chamberlain, who was coached by dozens of coachs in his career, and who played with, and against, hundreds, if not thousands, of players, and who was followed by hundreds, if not thousands, of members of the media, and who was watched by perhaps millions of fans...and yet, not one credible eye-witness has ever come forth and claimed that Wilt couldn't do all of the above. Don't you think that at least one teammate must have witnessed Chamberlain's leaping ability, perhaps attempting to touch the top of the backboard, or doing a max on the bench, and would have disputed all of these claims, if indeed Wilt hadn't accomplished them?

Maybe the OP's photo is deceptive, or bogus. So what? There now exists so much evidence of just how incredible an athlete that Wilt was. Even the Chamberlain-haters have come to aacept that they no longer have a leg to stand on when it comes to diminishing what we now know (and was well-known at the time.)

[daj0264]

essays being written about a picture about basketball?? :roll:

[tgan3]

http://i39.tinypic.com/5fosiw.jpg

If you look at this backboard it is different from NBA backboards as NBA backboards would be cut off at the rim connector. But this one extends a few more inches from the rim connector, thus that white guy was able to touch the backboard on tip-toes.

If its not that surprising actually. I had a friend who was 6'5 who standing flat foot and raising his arms could almost reach the backboard of that kind.

[andgar923]

A. Either Wilt was Plastic Man, because his feet appear to only be about 30 inches off the floor

or

B. The angle is misleading.

[Mrofir]

A. Either Wilt was Plastic Man, because his feet appear to only be about 30 inches off the floor

or

B. The angle is misleading.


I'm just glad we have eliminated

D. The rims were lowered

and

E. This game was being played on Mars where the gravity is significantly weaker

[bmd]

I don't have a problem with him making videos and finding old footages. He tries to pass off as a credible source, since he makes videos. I applaud him for that.

The problem is that he is using a distorted picture to try and lie to us that Wilt jumps that high.

Pretty much he either fvcked up by creating this thread -or- he really trying to lie to us.

Either way....:facepalmHe's done things like this many times before.

[LAZERUSS]

On a somewhat related note, how about this?

In the 73-74 season, and a year after Wilt had retired, Kareem averaged 3.5 bpg. His career high would be 4.1 bpg, and at age 28. At age 31 he was still blocking 4.0 bpg, and at age 32, and in the 79-80 season, he led the NBA at 3.4 bpg.

Now, thanks to ThaRegul8r, we now have solid evidence of Wilt, in his last season, and at age 36, averaging 5.4 bpg. Just twelve years after that, a prime 7-3 or 7-4 Mark Eaton would set the "official" NBA record at 5.6 bpg.

And yet a 36 year old Wilt, at over 300 lbs, and playing on a surgically repaired knee, was blocking 5.4 shots per game.

And there are educated estimates which have Wilt with seasons of 10+. There are estimates with Chamberlain blocking 30+ shots in a game. And, in a nationally televised game in 1968, SI counted Chamberlain with 23 blocked shots (15 in one half alone.) Even as late as the '72 playoffs, Chamberlain was averaging over 7 bpg, including a ton of blocked shots against the 7-2Kareem.

[CavaliersFTW]

As always, not to be difficult, but I feel like there's 3,452 other photos that don't rely on misleading angles and perspective that could have shown Wilt's incredible reach and athleticism (even a still shot from the past-his-prime All-Star block would have sufficed). Pauk used to try to play the same card with LeBron James. Both guys have tons of legitimate evidence showing how great of athletes they were (and how high they could jump) so I do not believe misleading pictures like this do a lot for the cause.

It's like trying to prove to people how high Shawn Kemp could jump by showing them this picture:

http://img498.imageshack.us/img498/5176/shawnkemp7jc.jpg
I respect this opinion no worries - I still think this is a fun pic of Wilt skying for a block - whether it be "odd angle" or not

as for the "lowered rim" people :lol :facepalm c'mon guys it was a legitimate NCAA game AFAIK they don't lower the rims during NCAA games

[CavaliersFTW]

bmd and 9erempire -

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fXbmgvDywjw/TGjY8Bv-IbI/AAAAAAAAAOk/zSBPb-h_dZc/s1600/eternal-facepalm-eternal-facepalm-facepalm-captain-pickard-demotivational-poster-1242264259.jpg

let's be honest here, you guys just hate me, you don't even give a shit about the pics or threads I make - at this point its just personal :lol

[CavaliersFTW]

Excellent post. :cheers:

The point being that, for years the naysayers would argue that since there was no footage that existed, or no bonafide first-hand eye-witness accounts, that these Wilt "myths" were simply untrue.

However, thanks to CavsFan, and other's, we now have video footage which clearly depicts a Wilt leap with his fingertips within a couple of inches from the top of the backboard (on a leap in which he had no time to react, without benefit of a running start, and going straight up.) And there is other footage of an old Chamberlain, at over 300 lbs, on a surgically repaired knee, and again without benefit of a running start, blocking a shot in a '71 playoff game, in which his fingertips are at the top of the square. And, as mentioned, a block in a late 60's all-star game, in which he is within inches of the top of the backboard.

There are probably many eye-witnesses to Wilt touching the top of the backboard, since it was common knowledge when he played, but in any case, Sonny Hill, a well-respected Philly sports icon, and Al Domenico, the longtime Sixer trainer, have both claimed to have witnessed such a feat.

There are KU newspaper accounts which have Wilt dunking on an experimental 12 ft. rim that rolled out by his coach.

There is an eye-witness account, by none other than Tex Winter, who claimed to have witnessed a high school Chamberlain (at less than 7-0) taking three steps and dunking from the FT line. He was so shocked that he lobbied to put a rule that was put in place which prevented such "freakish activity."

I am more amazed though, at those who don't believe it was possible. Here was a Wilt at over 7-1 (and there is a lot of debate at just how much over BTW), with a measured 7-8 wingpan, and who was winning college highjump championships (part-time and with very poor technique.) We know that Chamberlain had a standing reach in college, of 9'6", and there is some evidence which suggests that he was around 7-0 then, and probably grew at least an inch after that. Touching the top of the backboard, with just one out-stretched hand would probably require less than a 42" vertical.

How fast was Chamberlain? In his own biography, he claimed that in college, he ran a 4.4 40. BTW, he was a member of KU's 4x100 yard relay team, and obviously was an established sprinter. But before someon scoffs at that 4.4, we have the eye-witness clocking by none other than Chief's head coach Hank Stram, of a 27 year old Wilt, at over 290 lbs, running a 4.6 (and this was a Chamberlain whose last track events had occured some five-six years before that.) Of course, there is now video footage which shows a college Wilt running end-to-end in a game, and in it, he is just blowing by everyone.

How strong was Chamberlain? Well the internet has been plastered with accounts of Wilt benching 500+ lbs for years. Here again, the Wilt-bashers will ask for video evidence, in an era in which even his 100 point game was not filmed. But, we have many first-hand accounts of at least a Wilt with extraordinary strength, including one which claims that a 59 year old Wilt was benching 465 lbs. None other than Arnold Schwartzenegger, in a video interview, was stunned by just how strong Chamberlain was. In Robert Cherry's book on Wilt, he interviewed a well-known weight-lifter (his own words), in which a 6-5 250 lb man, who was known to have benched 500 lbs, claimed that Wilt was the strongest man he ever met.

And here again, the internet has page-after-page of descriptions of Wilt's staggering strength.

What is even more remarkable, however, is that here was a Chamberlain, who was coached by dozens of coachs in his career, and who played with, and against, hundreds, if not thousands, of players, and who was followed by hundreds, if not thousands, of members of the media, and who was watched by perhaps millions of fans...and yet, not one credible eye-witness has ever come forth and claimed that Wilt couldn't do all of the above. Don't you think that at least one teammate must have witnessed Chamberlain's leaping ability, perhaps attempting to touch the top of the backboard, or doing a max on the bench, and would have disputed all of these claims, if indeed Wilt hadn't accomplished them?

Maybe the OP's photo is deceptive, or bogus. So what? There now exists so much evidence of just how incredible an athlete that Wilt was. Even the Chamberlain-haters have come to aacept that they no longer have a leg to stand on when it comes to diminishing what we now know (and was well-known at the time.)
:roll: :bowdown: the GAWD of Wilt posts is back! :bowdown: :applause:

[9erempiree]

bmd and 9erempire -

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_fXbmgvDywjw/TGjY8Bv-IbI/AAAAAAAAAOk/zSBPb-h_dZc/s1600/eternal-facepalm-eternal-facepalm-facepalm-captain-pickard-demotivational-poster-1242264259.jpg

let's be honest here, you guys just hate me, you don't even give a shit about the pics or threads I make - at this point its just personal :lol

It's not that. I don't even like you enough to hate you.

I just find it odd that you make all these great videos with old footage but you use an odd angle shot to convince us how great he is athletically.

You could have just said....cool picture of Wilt or used another not-so deceiving picture of his athletic ability.

Show some credibility, for god's sake you are pretty famous for your videos and to take that all away with a thread trying to deceive the public.:facepalm

[bmd]

It's not that. I don't even like you enough to hate you.

I just find it odd that you make all these great videos with old footage but you use an odd angle shot to convince us how great he is athletically.

You could have just said....cool picture of Wilt or used another not-so deceiving picture of his athletic ability.

Show some credibility, for god's sake you are pretty famous for your videos and to take that all away with a thread trying to deceive the public.:facepalmYep. That is what I'm saying. Talking about Wilt being awesome and posting old video footage is cool... but it completely turns me off to the OP when he posts purposely deceitful things to make players like Wilt seem super human and exaggerate their legend.

Just tell it like it is. Don't try to lie and deceive people to pump up the mythical status of a legendary player.

Just be honest is all I'm saying.

[CavaliersFTW]

It's not that. I don't even like you enough to hate you.

I just find it odd that you make all these great videos with old footage but you use an odd angle shot to convince us how great he is athletically.

You could have just said....cool picture of Wilt or used another not-so deceiving picture of his athletic ability.

Show some credibility, for god's sake you are pretty famous for your videos and to take that all away with a thread trying to deceive the public.:facepalm
you got all that from me posting a pic? :lol

[CavaliersFTW]

Yep. That is what I'm saying. Talking about Wilt being awesome and posting old video footage is cool... but it completely turns me off to the OP when he posts purposely deceitful things to make players like Wilt seem super human and exaggerate their legend.

Just tell it like it is. Don't try to lie and deceive people to pump up the mythical status of a legendary player.

Just be honest is all I'm saying.
Tell me how you really feel

[9erempiree]

you got all that from me posting a pic? :lol

No.

I got that from what you said before you edited your OP. Stop backtracking I saw what you said before you edited your post and we called you out on being deceitful.

Now you edited just to save your face.

I have seen your videos on many big sites that uses your videos. It would be a shame if they knew the author is someone that lies to prop up Wilt. You would be doing a disservice to your very own videos.

[bmd]

Tell me how you really feelTalking about Wilt being awesome and posting old video footage is cool... but your opinion loses credibility when you post purposely deceitful things to make players like Wilt seem super human and exaggerate their legend.

Just tell it like it is. Don't try to lie and deceive people to pump up the mythical status of a legendary player.

Just be honest is all I'm saying.

[CavaliersFTW]

No.

I got that from what you said before you edited your OP.
I edited the OP like a minute after I posted and I don't even remember what was in it other than about 2 lines of text, I just remember I deleted it because I realized it was all unnecessary, the pic alone sufficed - seriously guys your trying to hard - this criticism feels forced :oldlol:

[CavaliersFTW]

Talking about Wilt being awesome and posting old video footage is cool... but your opinion loses credibility when you post purposely deceitful things to make players like Wilt seem super human and exaggerate their legend.

Just tell it like it is. Don't try to lie and deceive people to pump up the mythical status of a legendary player.

Just be honest is all I'm saying.
http://d22zlbw5ff7yk5.cloudfront.net/images/cm-35273-050bdde5c1e5d5.gif



































http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcx9gzIlbJ1rxl1gv.gif

[9erempiree]

I edited the OP like a minute after I posted and I don't even remember what was in it other than about 2 lines of text, I just remember I deleted it because I realized it was all unnecessary, the pic alone sufficed - seriously guys your trying to hard - this criticism feels forced :oldlol:

It's not forced just being real.

I actually watch your videos and recommend them to people who wanted to see how dominant Wilt was.

[Rake2204]

you got all that from me posting a pic? :lolNot to pile on, and I admit I don't always agree with those other guys, but in this case I definitely feel where they're coming from. I've mentioned this before as well. It's a strange contradiction because usually people providing great videos and/or mixes tend to be forthright and real.

But in your case, you're digging up all this great footage but then sometimes turning around and trying to sell it for something it's not. In truth, the footage is cool enough as it is. We'd talked before and you'd mentioned the stretching of truth was your way of selling your videos but again, I don't think that's necessary. Your videos are good enough to go beyond all of that. It's weird seeing something cool being provided, but then having the feeling someone's trying to deceive me about it to make it sound even cooler than it is (once again, that Gus Johnson/LeBron James/Michael Jordan thread is the big one that always sticks out, amongst others).

People say stupid stuff about your posts and videos that aren't true and should probably be kept to themselves (ex: "Basket's probably 8'5'' because it's college before that was regulated" or something like "Gus Johnson would be a poor man's Jonas Jerebko today.") I'm not saying I support any of that. But I don't think 9empire and bmd are trying to be unreasonable in the things they're saying. They're trying to help you. Continue doing a great job posting awesome videos and photos, but be real about them. That doesn't mean be boring and drab, but find a happy medium in there somewhere. When you make a thread using a distorted angle picture and claiming its someone touching the top of the backboard, you're just asking for trouble and the challenging of one's credibility.

[millwad]

On a somewhat related note, how about this?

In the 73-74 season, and a year after Wilt had retired, Kareem averaged 3.5 bpg. His career high would be 4.1 bpg, and at age 28. At age 31 he was still blocking 4.0 bpg, and at age 32, and in the 79-80 season, he led the NBA at 3.4 bpg.

Now, thanks to ThaRegul8r, we now have solid evidence of Wilt, in his last season, and at age 36, averaging 5.4 bpg. Just twelve years after that, a prime 7-3 or 7-4 Mark Eaton would set the "official" NBA record at 5.6 bpg.

And yet a 36 year old Wilt, at over 300 lbs, and playing on a surgically repaired knee, was blocking 5.4 shots per game.

And there are educated estimates which have Wilt with seasons of 10+. There are estimates with Chamberlain blocking 30+ shots in a game. And, in a nationally televised game in 1968, SI counted Chamberlain with 23 blocked shots (15 in one half alone.) Even as late as the '72 playoffs, Chamberlain was averaging over 7 bpg, including a ton of blocked shots against the 7-2Kareem.

Haha, did time stand still for you, Jlauber?

[unbreakable]

that ball is clearly near the top of the backboard and anyone who says otherwise is a baby back bitch

[stanlove1111]

Excellent post. :cheers:

is other footage of an old Chamberlain, at over 300 lbs, on a surgically repaired knee, and again without benefit of a running start, blocking a shot in a '71 playoff game,.)


Can we stop with the surgically repaired knee stuff that Wilt lovers talk about all over the internet..They constantly try to bring this up to show Wilt wasn't 100 percent. Its nonsense. Like it says the knee was REPAIRED..

I was a huge fan of basketball and Wilt at the time and nobody was talking about how Wilt's knees were keeping him down in 1971. He wasn't 300 pounds either..That campaign started when Shaq was around and Wilt fans become obsessed with trying to make it seem like Wilt was about as big as Shaq..Not even close.


This thread is silly..We already know that Wilt with his head up to the rim can't touch the top of the backboard..Here we have a picture with his head below the rin and a Wilt backer saying that he is near the top of the backboard..Wrong..I think this guy is the one that goes around on youtube saying Willis Reed was 6'11 to try to add to Wilt's feats..Guys like this think they are helping Wilt with this silliness but you are actually making him a laughingstock to the younger generation.

MY 17 year old son watched the 1973 game last week between the Lakers and Knicks and laughed when I asked him if he thought Wilt weighed 300. he also laughed at Wilt's moves ( of lack there of ) when he got the ball. he is used to seeing todays players..He also laughs at 1980s defenses. He can see right off that defenses have evolved. he also plays at a pretty high level for a coach is known for teaching great defense. Why cant old timers just admit this which is obvious.


I rate Wilt among the top 6 ever because he dominated his time like he did, but if you put Wilt from 1973 into todays game he is no big deal. Players today life weights unlike the guys Wilt played against. If you let him start from scratch and learn todays came from an early age then you could speculate that he would be really good. But please old timers stop with the crazyness, its embarrassing to other old timers like me..

I rate players by how they did during their time but the game is always evolving..

[Alan Ogg]

Bill Russell claims he used to be able to grab quarters off the top of the back of the backboard and no one ever gives him sh*t about that. As far as the picture, I'm not sure but I do think Wilt could touch the top of the backboard at his prime.

[fpliii]

Can we stop with the surgically repaired knee stuff that Wilt lovers talk about all over the internet..They constantly try to bring this up to show Wilt wasn't 100 percent. Its nonsense. Like it says the knee was REPAIRED..

I was a huge fan of basketball and Wilt at the time and nobody was talking about how Wilt's knees were keeping him down in 1971. He wasn't 300 pounds either..That campaign started when Shaq was around and Wilt fans become obsessed with trying to make it seem like Wilt was about as big as Shaq..Not even close.


This thread is silly..We already know that Wilt with his head up to the rim can't touch the top of the backboard..Here we have a picture with his head below the rin and a Wilt backer saying that he is near the top of the backboard..Wrong..I think this guy is the one that goes around on youtube saying Willis Reed was 6'11 to try to add to Wilt's feats..Guys like this think they are helping Wilt with this silliness but you are actually making him a laughingstock to the younger generation.

MY 17 year old son watched the 1973 game last week between the Lakers and Knicks and laughed when I asked him if he thought Wilt weighed 300. he also laughed at Wilt's moves ( of lack there of ) when he got the ball. he is used to seeing todays players..He also laughs at 1980s defenses. He can see right off that defenses have evolved. he also plays at a pretty high level for a coach is known for teaching great defense. Why cant old timers just admit this which is obvious.


I rate Wilt among the top 6 ever because he dominated his time like he did, but if you put Wilt from 1973 into todays game he is no big deal. Players today life weights unlike the guys Wilt played against. If you let him start from scratch and learn todays came from an early age then you could speculate that he would be really good. But please old timers stop with the crazyness, its embarrassing to other old timers like me..

I rate players by how they did during their time but the game is always evolving..

I'm not a Wilt guy per se, but I have to call you out on the weight thing. There are plenty of mentions (from around Hannum's time in SF, and Wilt's Lakers tenure) citing a near- or above-300 lb Chamberlain (media guides from those seasons support this). There is no revisionist history, and I have no reason not to trust the numerous sources out there.

[CavaliersFTW]

Not to pile on, and I admit I don't always agree with those other guys, but in this case I definitely feel where they're coming from. I've mentioned this before as well. It's a strange contradiction because usually people providing great videos and/or mixes tend to be forthright and real.

But in your case, you're digging up all this great footage but then sometimes turning around and trying to sell it for something it's not. In truth, the footage is cool enough as it is. We'd talked before and you'd mentioned the stretching of truth was your way of selling your videos but again, I don't think that's necessary. Your videos are good enough to go beyond all of that. It's weird seeing something cool being provided, but then having the feeling someone's trying to deceive me about it to make it sound even cooler than it is (once again, that Gus Johnson/LeBron James/Michael Jordan thread is the big one that always sticks out, amongst others).

People say stupid stuff about your posts and videos that aren't true and should probably be kept to themselves (ex: "Basket's probably 8'5'' because it's college before that was regulated" or something like "Gus Johnson would be a poor man's Jonas Jerebko today.") I'm not saying I support any of that. But I don't think 9empire and bmd are trying to be unreasonable in the things they're saying. They're trying to help you. Continue doing a great job posting awesome videos and photos, but be real about them. That doesn't mean be boring and drab, but find a happy medium in there somewhere. When you make a thread using a distorted angle picture and claiming its someone touching the top of the backboard, you're just asking for trouble and the challenging of one's credibility.
In the Gus Johnson thread I re-posted comparisons OTHER PLAYERS and writers had made of Gus Johnson. Gus drew comparisons to Michael Jordan during the 1980's because MJ's jumping ability and flair resembled his. Is that my problem? I guess since some of you guys who had a fit about it needed a source to blame you just decide to blame me since you must have never heard those comparisons before. All I do is find the headlines, the footage, the comparisons, the interviews etc from outside sources. If it's a video clip or a pic, I'll say shit like "near the top of the backboard" or "near the free throw line" - whatever, who cares? Am I wrong to include a SUBJECTIVE descriptive word? And here's a tip for you: don't tell a poster who your trying to pass any semblance of advice to, that your siding with 2 idiots who are clearly trolling. :no:

I'm going to continue being me, the only way I know how. And you guys who have a problem with my post style, are going to have to adapt to it, and chill out. Shit, troll me for it, idc. But seriously, don't with sincerity side with a troll then attempt to tell me what to do, that will legitimately put you on my bad side.

[ProfessorMurder]

Can we stop with the surgically repaired knee stuff that Wilt lovers talk about all over the internet..They constantly try to bring this up to show Wilt wasn't 100 percent. Its nonsense. Like it says the knee was REPAIRED..

MY 17 year old son watched the 1973 game last week between the Lakers and Knicks and laughed when I asked him if he thought Wilt weighed 300. he also laughed at Wilt's moves ( of lack there of ) when he got the ball. he is used to seeing todays players..He also laughs at 1980s defenses. He can see right off that defenses have evolved. he also plays at a pretty high level for a coach is known for teaching great defense. Why cant old timers just admit this which is obvious.

KG's knee is repaired, that must mean his athleticism is good as it was in 2008 right?

Also, your son sounds like an idiot.

[Psycho]

.875/.125=7

[Rake2204]

In the Gus Johnson thread I re-posted comparisons OTHER PLAYERS and writers had made of Gus Johnson. Gus drew comparisons to Michael Jordan during the 1980's because MJ's jumping ability and flair resembled his. Is that my problem? I guess since some of you guys who had a fit about it needed a source to blame you just decide to blame me since you must have never heard those comparisons before. All I do is find the headlines, the footage, the comparisons, the interviews etc from outside sources. If it's a video clip or a pic, I'll say shit like "near the top of the backboard" or "near the free throw line" - whatever, who cares? Am I wrong to include a SUBJECTIVE descriptive word? And here's a tip for you: don't tell a poster who your trying to pass any semblance of advice to, that your siding with 2 idiots who are clearly trolling. :no:

I'm going to continue being me, the only way I know how. And you guys who have a problem with my post style, are going to have to adapt to it, and chill out. Shit, troll me for it, idc. But seriously, don't with sincerity side with a troll then attempt to tell me what to do, that will legitimately put you on my bad side.I was just trying to help. I suppose it depends upon what your goal is. If your goal is to educate, the misleading subjectivity often seems to only invite criticism and I'd agree with others who believe that's not necessarily helping the cause of enlightening folks on players of the past. I mean, it'll get more attention, because people will look to see what you're talking about when say something crazy like "Near the top of the backboard" but in this case I don't know if all attention is good attention.

For instance, on the flip side there's a thread on page one right now about an old David Robinson/Magic Johnson showdown. It doesn't have a ton of attention right now, but the attention it does have is mostly all good, because the thread title didn't say something like, "David Robinson Repeatedly Dunks on Magic Johnson!" It's a real and honest share. But then again, who am I to say what your goal is? It just seems on one hand, your research and creations suggest maturity and professionalism but the matter with which you share it sometimes appears otherwise.

It's not a big deal at all, I'm just trying to help you realize where some people are coming from. Whether posters usually make poor posts or not, it doesn't necessarily nullify everything they ever say ever. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once and a while, as they say. I do not believe anyone's necessarily out of control or not chilled out here. It's just more, if you wonder why your threads sometimes get negative or sidetracked responses, it may have to do with the manner with which you post. Basically, I believe if people see a thread claiming a player's near the top of the backboard, they're likely not going to be pumped about seeing a distorted low angle shot that clearly suggests otherwise.

And for the record, your Gus Johnson thread title was "First in Flight - The original MJ and Lebron of the NBA | (Gus Johnson)". Can you not see how that might get things started off on the wrong foot? I'm not trying to tell you what to do here, I'm just trying to help. I've seen some posters disagree with some of your assertions at times and you sometimes seem to dismiss them as merely trolling you. As I could see where some of those posters were coming from, I thought I'd contribute. But I suppose perhaps it is not my place.

[CavaliersFTW]

I was just trying to help. I suppose it depends upon what your goal is. If your goal is to educate, the misleading subjectivity often seems to only invite criticism and I'd agree with others who believe that's not necessarily helping the cause of enlightening folks on players of the past. I mean, it'll get more attention, because people will look to see what you're talking about when say something crazy like "Near the top of the backboard" but in this case I don't know if all attention is good attention.

For instance, on the flip side there's a thread on page one right now about an old David Robinson/Magic Johnson showdown. It doesn't have a ton of attention right now, but the attention it does have is mostly all good, because the thread title didn't say something like, "David Robinson Repeatedly Dunks on Magic Johnson!" It's a real and honest share. But then again, who am I to say what your goal is? It just seems on one hand, your research and creations suggest maturity and professionalism but the matter with which you share it sometimes appears otherwise.

It's not a big deal at all, I'm just trying to help you realize where some people are coming from. Whether posters usually make poor posts or not, it doesn't necessarily nullify everything they ever say ever. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once and a while, as they say. I do not believe anyone's necessarily out of control or not chilled out here. It's just more, if you wonder why your threads sometimes get negative or sidetracked responses, it may have to do with the manner with which you post. Basically, I believe if people see a thread claiming a player's near the top of the backboard, they're likely not going to be pumped about seeing a distorted low angle shot that clearly suggests otherwise.

And for the record, your Gus Johnson thread title was "First in Flight - The original MJ and Lebron of the NBA | (Gus Johnson)". Can you not see how that might get things started off on the wrong foot? I'm not trying to tell you what to do here, I'm just trying to help. I've seen some posters disagree with some of your assertions at times and you sometimes seem to dismiss them as merely trolling you. As I could see where some of those posters were coming from, I thought I'd contribute. But I suppose perhaps it is not my place.
http://www.jockbio.com/Classic/Gus_Johnson/Gus_Johnson_bio.html
What's the title of this bio? (First in flight) - read the first two paragraphs. Whether you agree with it or not, doesn't matter to me - I'm not the source of it. Defensively he was called the greatest defensive forward of all time by the Chicago Bulls GM (this is before Pippen's rise to prominence). I can't recall who, but I remember reading/listening to at least two other players (not just the writers of the bio) compare him to MJ as well, I think Sam Jones was one who said it? I'll have to look that up it's been a while since I was reading up on Gus. Also who does Nate Thurmond compare Gus Johnson to verbally in an interview (audio clip used in mix video)? Lebron James. Every testimonial from players about Gus is the same theme, the guy was great, better than his late-start injury plagued "resume" indicates - and strictly from a talent point of view was up there with all-time great freak athletes such as MJ or Lebron James in terms of raw ability, style, and athleticism etc.

If you have a problem with ANY of those types of comparisons, you need to take it up with the sources of them and stop hating on me for borrowing them and using them for my own thread titles. I do not create those comparisons, nor even the headlines - it's all borrowed. If you want to side with the trolls on this subject, that's your own prerogative. But I know exactly where they're coming from and most of it isn't sincere like you think it is, it's just trolling because the thread titles sound like "bold statements". Most of the fans who've complained in those threads are the same ones who make titles calling Kobe GawdBe or Westbrook GOATbrook etc, trying to inflate the stock of all their favorite players just like everyone else does. I appreciate that you want my threads to receive more positive attention via recieving "less" all around attention by using boring headlines, but I just don't see what the big deal is with borrowing headlines and player comments the way I do.

[Rake2204]

http://www.jockbio.com/Classic/Gus_Johnson/Gus_Johnson_bio.html
What's the title of this bio? (First in flight) - read the first two paragraphs. Whether you agree with it or not, doesn't matter to me - I'm not the source of it. Defensively he was called the greatest defensive forward of all time by the Chicago Bulls GM (this is before Pippen's rise to prominence). I can't recall who, but I remember reading/listening to at least two other players (not just the writers of the bio) compare him to MJ as well, I think Sam Jones was one who said it? I'll have to look that up it's been a while since I was reading up on Gus. Also who does Nate Thurmond compare Gus Johnson to verbally in an interview (audio clip used in mix video)? Lebron James. Every testimonial from players about Gus is the same theme, the guy was great, better than his late-start injury plagued "resume" indicates - and strictly from a talent point of view was up there with all-time great freak athletes such as MJ or Lebron James in terms of raw ability, style, and athleticism etc.

If you have a problem with ANY of those types of comparisons, you need to take it up with the sources of them and stop hating on me for borrowing them and using them for my own thread titles. I do not create those comparisons, nor even the headlines - it's all borrowed. If you want to side with the trolls on this subject, that's your own prerogative. But I know exactly where they're coming from and most of it isn't sincere like you think it is, it's just trolling because the thread titles sound like "bold statements". Most of the fans who've complained in those threads are the same ones who make titles calling Kobe GawdBe or Westbrook GOATbrook etc, trying to inflate the stock of all their favorite players just like everyone else does. I appreciate that you want my threads to receive more positive attention via recieving "less" all around attention by using boring headlines, but I just don't see what the big deal is with borrowing headlines and player comments the way I do.Yeah, I can see where you're coming from in many regards. As I mentioned before, whether JockBios.com said it or not, I'd personally probably steer away from calling Gus Johnson the original LeBron James and Michael Jordan just because I'd be setting up something I wanted to share for heavy criticism, since people would just watch the linked video and see virtually nothing in common with James or Jordan.

On the flip side, as I mentioned in that thread, if the Gus Johnson topic was approached from a little more conservative angle (without focusing on LeBron/Jordan and a story about him jumping over Willis Reed from the free throw line), I'm guessing you wouldn't have seen as many critical responses, of which you do not seem to be a fan.

A poster in that Johnson thread went a little overboard, but it seemed instead of taking any of his issues into account, you took the worst things he said and deemed his entire side invalid. Similarly, a couple of guys said some things that seemed to hold some weight but instead of being honest with oneself and addressing the validity of their statements, you quickly assume they're simply hating to hate. And maybe you'd be right, but if I didn't know who said these comments:


I just find it odd that you make all these great videos with old footage but you use an odd angle shot to convince us how great he is athletically.

You could have just said....cool picture of Wilt or used another not-so deceiving picture of his athletic ability.

That is what I'm saying. Talking about Wilt being awesome and posting old video footage is cool... but it completely turns me off to the OP when he posts purposely deceitful things to make players like Wilt seem super human and exaggerate their legend.

Just tell it like it is. Don't try to lie and deceive people to pump up the mythical status of a legendary player.

Just be honest is all I'm saying.

...I'd say they both sound completely sensible. They're not even really hating on you. As I've said in the past (and others), we all acknowledge your work and we think it's cool. We just think legends are great enough with their real stories and facts, without the need for someone to constantly try to mislead things.

[Akhenaten]

weird pic


the dude in front of number 35 seems to be touching the bottom of the backboard without even jumping

I call shenanigans
BTW, op you're 26 stop acting like yu have any perspective or context on people who played 50 yrs ago, it's lame as hell.

[bdreason]

9 white guys standing around in awe. :oldlol:

[Replay32]

weird pic


the dude in front of number 35 seems to be touching the bottom of the backboard without even jumping

I call shenanigans
BTW, op you're 26 stop acting like yu have any perspective or context on people who played 50 yrs ago, it's lame as hell.

This. Camera angle. I used to respect the OP as a poster, but with his recent threads/post he's lost all credibility.

[CavaliersFTW]

Yeah, I can see where you're coming from in many regards. As I mentioned before, whether JockBios.com said it or not, I'd personally probably steer away from calling Gus Johnson the original LeBron James and Michael Jordan just because I'd be setting up something I wanted to share for heavy criticism, since people would just watch the linked video and see virtually nothing in common with James or Jordan.

On the flip side, as I mentioned in that thread, if the Gus Johnson topic was approached from a little more conservative angle (without focusing on LeBron/Jordan and a story about him jumping over Willis Reed from the free throw line), I'm guessing you wouldn't have seen as many critical responses, of which you do not seem to be a fan.

A poster in that Johnson thread went a little overboard, but it seemed instead of taking any of his issues into account, you took the worst things he said and deemed his entire side invalid. Similarly, a couple of guys said some things that seemed to hold some weight but instead of being honest with oneself and addressing the validity of their statements, you quickly assume they're simply hating to hate. And maybe you'd be right, but if I didn't know who said these comments:




...I'd say they both sound completely sensible. They're not even really hating on you. As I've said in the past (and others), we all acknowledge your work and we think it's cool. We just think legends are great enough with their real stories and facts, without the need for someone to constantly try to mislead things.
I find it personally offensive that you think I "constantly try to mislead things." And that you state you think the legends are great enough "with their real stories and facts" - which is a direct implication that you believe I deliberately post fake stories, and fake facts?

You've got me misunderstood, if that's your take on things. And with that, we're done discussing this.

[bmd]

I find it personally offensive that you think I "constantly try to mislead things." And that you state you think the legends are great enough "with their real stories and facts" - which is a direct implication that you believe I deliberately post fake stories, and fake facts?

You've got me misunderstood, if that's your take on things. And with that, we're done discussing this.You DO purposely try to mislead and deceive. It's not even up for debate.

You do, and that's a fact.

[stanlove1111]

I'm not a Wilt guy per se, but I have to call you out on the weight thing. There are plenty of mentions (from around Hannum's time in SF, and Wilt's Lakers tenure) citing a near- or above-300 lb Chamberlain (media guides from those seasons support this). There is no revisionist history, and I have no reason not to trust the numerous sources out there.


Either Wilt didn't weigh 300 or everyone else in the history of the league had their weight wrong. At this rate Wilt was bigger then Reed by the same degree that Reed was bigger then Jerry West. And so on with basically every example of everyone who ever played. Anyone who said at the time that Wilt weighed 300 was exaggerating and that's obvious by looking at pictures of him. I can't believe anyone could believe he weighed that much in his SF days..

[stanlove1111]

In the Gus Johnson thread I re-posted comparisons OTHER PLAYERS and writers had made of Gus Johnson. Gus drew comparisons to Michael Jordan during the 1980's because MJ's jumping ability and flair resembled his. Is that my problem? I guess since some of you guys who had a fit about it needed a source to blame you just decide to blame me since you must have never heard those comparisons before. All I do is find the headlines, the footage, the comparisons, the interviews etc from outside sources. If it's a video clip or a pic, I'll say shit like "near the top of the backboard" or "near the free throw line" - whatever, who cares? Am I wrong to include a SUBJECTIVE descriptive word? And here's a tip for you: don't tell a poster who your trying to pass any semblance of advice to, that your siding with 2 idiots who are clearly trolling. :no:

I'm going to continue being me, the only way I know how. And you guys who have a problem with my post style, are going to have to adapt to it, and chill out. Shit, troll me for it, idc. But seriously, don't with sincerity side with a troll then attempt to tell me what to do, that will legitimately put you on my bad side.


Anyone who compares Johnson to Jordan is delusional..Its old timers remembering a good athlete for their day and thinking they would compare to athletes of today..Things have evolved..How can you honestly not see that?


Like I said you are making old time players laughingstocks with this. My Son for one was real interested in Wilt and especially the 100 point game that he saw a docu on. Said next time he goes to Hersey he would love to visit the site..But then when he sees people thinking you can take a guy from 50 years ago and outplay todays players and reads Wilt's ridiculous comments he just laughs about it.. He has seen the films and it really really obvious that the game has evolved a ton since Wilt played His moved in todays terms are laughable... Wilt played against skinny non weight lifting players who exaggerate Wilt's size and strength because again he was stronger then non weight lifting players 50 years ago..

I have to wonder how someone can not really see that.

[stanlove1111]

I find it personally offensive that you think I "constantly try to mislead things." And that you state you think the legends are great enough "with their real stories and facts" - which is a direct implication that you believe I deliberately post fake stories, and fake facts?

You've got me misunderstood, if that's your take on things. And with that, we're done discussing this.


You have an agenda and you cherry pick..

By the way you' love to talk about old timers exaggerating how big and strong Wilt was ( because they were non weight lifters at that time ) but did you mention that Frazier during the showing of the 1973 game said that Willis was a lot stronger then Wilt in 1973?

[CavaliersFTW]

Either Wilt didn't weigh 300 or everyone else in the history of the league had their weight wrong. At this rate Wilt was bigger then Reed by the same degree that Reed was bigger then Jerry West. And so on with basically every example of everyone who ever played. Anyone who said at the time that Wilt weighed 300 was exaggerating and that's obvious by looking at pictures of him. I can't believe anyone could believe he weighed that much in his SF days..
Wilt was overweight coming into the 1963-64 season. Rapidly cutting from 320lbs day 1 of training camp to, 315lbs, to about 300lbs by the start of the regular season. Chick Hearn states during a Laker documentary made just before all-star break of that same season that Wilt then weighed precisely "292lbs". 290lbs is also the weight cited by Hank Stram (Kansas City Chiefs coach) 1 year later who worked out Wilt for a few weeks to try to get him to play football. Numerous other sources from this point forward cite Wilt's weight as typically being between no less than 275 (his official list weight at the time) to over 300lbs.

http://i.usatoday.net/communitymanager/_photos/game-on/2011/11/03/wiltx-large.jpg

This is Wilt during the "292lbs" season. Considering his stature, who are you to second guess all the information?

More information on his weight is: 1 month prior to his first ever NBA debut game, he was cited as tipping the scale at exactly 258lbs (he weighed below 240 a few seasons prior in the NCAA). His "official" rookie listed weight was 250lbs. 3 seasons later during the 1962 NBA season (his 50ppg season) he is cited as weighing 265lbs. 5 seasons into his career is when he ballooned to the 300+ (again... overweight at that time). He did cut back to 290 for a bit until filling out even more through his life-long weight lifting habits.

Your assuming all the bball reference list info of the other players he played against is accurate. It isn't any more accurate than his own bball reference list weight. Players like Wayne Embry balooned up to 270-280lbs from the 240 or w/e he was listed. Walt Bellamy is cited as 265lbs later in his career. Bill Russell, listed 215, weighed 240lbs by his final season. Petit weighed 240lbs in his later years as well, despite listing something like 210 or w/e. Most "bigs" filled out after their rookie seasons. It's a pattern that happens today too, I mean, Joakim Noah weighed 224 as a rookie you think he still weighs 224 now?

[CavaliersFTW]

You have an agenda and you cherry pick..

By the way you' love to talk about old timers exaggerating how big and strong Wilt was ( because they were non weight lifters at that time ) but did you mention that Frazier during the showing of the 1973 game said that Willis was a lot stronger then Wilt in 1973?
Seeing as how I did not see that game, how could I? Willis was considered one of the strongest players in the NBA at the time so if Frazier says that about his teammate I really wouldn't be that surprised - he probably believed it at the time too, whether it be true or not - after all it is his teammate. In the 1970 ASG Jack Twyman says the front court of Gus Johnson and Willis Reed is about as strong a front court as the NBA has during that game (Wilt was injured and could not play that game). Also, the final game of the 1970 NBA Finals Twyman says Reed is one of the few players in the league that is able to hold his own against Wilt's strength and be able to box out and push and shove a bit. So clearly the picture being painted is, Willis Reed was one of the strongest players in the league at the time too. Funny how you bring a Frazier quote up, you know he's the same guy who thinks Wilt would average 70 or 75ppg in today's league, right? I would think you wouldn't respect him after that, because you think NBA players of the past are only good for their time.

[stanlove1111]

Wilt was overweight coming into the 1963-64 season. Rapidly cutting from 320lbs day 1 of training camp to, 315lbs, to about 300lbs by the start of the regular season. Chick Hearn states during a Laker documentary made just before all-star break of that same season that Wilt then weighed precisely "292lbs". 290lbs is also the weight cited by Hank Stram (Kansas City Chiefs coach) 1 year later who worked out Wilt for a few weeks to try to get him to play football. Numerous other sources from this point forward cite Wilt's weight as typically being between no less than 275 (his official list weight at the time) to over 300lbs.

http://i.usatoday.net/communitymanager/_photos/game-on/2011/11/03/wiltx-large.jpg

This is Wilt during the "292lbs" season. Considering his stature, who are you to second guess all the information?

More information on his weight is: 1 month prior to his first ever NBA debut game, he was cited as tipping the scale at exactly 258lbs (he weighed below 240 a few seasons prior in the NCAA). His "official" rookie listed weight was 250lbs. 3 seasons later during the 1962 NBA season (his 50ppg season) he is cited as weighing 265lbs. 5 seasons into his career is when he ballooned to the 300+ (again... overweight at that time). He did cut back to 290 for a bit until filling out even more through his life-long weight lifting habits.

Your assuming all the bball reference list info of the other players he played against is accurate. It isn't any more accurate than his own bball reference list weight. Players like Wayne Embry balooned up to 270-280lbs from the 240 or w/e he was listed. Walt Bellamy is cited as 265lbs later in his career. Bill Russell, listed 215, weighed 240lbs by his final season. Petit weighed 240lbs in his later years as well, despite listing something like 210 or w/e. Most "bigs" filled out after their rookie seasons. It's a pattern that happens today too, I mean, Joakim Noah weighed 224 as a rookie you think he still weighs 224 now?


This changes nothing. Then you think Wilt outweighed rookie Willis Reed by the same degree that Reed outweighed Jerry West and so on ad so on..I a sure if you have to to build up Wilt you will agree to that..

If you think Wilt in your picture weighs s much as Nikola Peković then I don't know what to tell you. Wilt looked big in the day because he was plying against non weight lifting players..End of story.

Question..Did Wilt n 1964 outweigh rookie Reed by the same degree that Reed outweighed Jerry West? yes or no.

By the way I love your videos.

[stanlove1111]

Seeing as how I did not see that game, how could I? Willis was considered one of the strongest players in the NBA at the time so if Frazier says that about his teammate I really wouldn't be that surprised - he probably believed it at the time too, whether it be true or not - after all it is his teammate. In the 1970 ASG Jack Twyman says the front court of Gus Johnson and Willis Reed is about as strong a front court as the NBA has during that game (Wilt was injured and could not play that game). Also, the final game of the 1970 NBA Finals Twyman says Reed is one of the few players in the league that is able to hold his own against Wilt's strength and be able to box out and push and shove a bit. So clearly the picture being painted is, Willis Reed was one of the strongest players in the league at the time too. Funny how you bring a Frazier quote up, you know he's the same guy who thinks Wilt would average 70 or 75ppg in today's league, right? I would think you wouldn't respect him after that, because you think NBA players of the past are only good for their time.


I guess you didn't get my point. Obviously if you watched at the time Reed was not as strong as Wilt. Reed even admitted this and he was the one pushing against him all the time. My point s if you want to cherry pick statements then you can make any silly argument you want. You can always find someone who says what you want to hear.


The 70 points thing was really funny. Frazier should try standup.

y argument you want..

[CavaliersFTW]

I guess you didn't get my point. Obviously if you watched at the time Reed was not as strong as Wilt. Reed even admitted this and he was the one pushing against him all the time. My point s if you want to cherry pick statements then you can make any silly argument you want. You can always find someone who says what you want to hear.


The 70 points thing was really funny. Frazier should try standup.

y argument you want..
The explanation I just gave you - with variety of sources and context - kind of makes your accusations and "point" pretty unnecessary, no?

[Legends66NBA7]

so did you became a fan of him through old highlights and reading myths about him?

He's mentioned many times that he's in his mid-20's. He's fan of the guy by reading, watching, and studying about Wilt. Move along.

[stanlove1111]

The explanation I just gave you - with variety of sources and context - kind of makes your accusations and "point" pretty unnecessary, no?

No..

As far as I see Frazier is the only one who said that reed was stronger then Wilt..Could be someone is wrong, No? And I believe Frazier said he was a lot stronger at the time..Thats why I take quotes like that with a gran of salt..Sometimes common sense and your own eyes has to come into it.That is probably something you should think about.

If you think Reed was stronger then Wilt just because a guy says so, then please don't even get into the Shaq vs Wilt thing.If Reed was stronger then Wilt I would hate to see what Shaq would do to him.

[oh the horror]

Look at all those fat, 5'10 white guys. I would not be surprised if that rim was at 8'5:facepalm


If you see any "fat" guys in that pic then you need new glasses dude.

[CavaliersFTW]

This changes nothing. Then you think Wilt outweighed rookie Willis Reed by the same degree that Reed outweighed Jerry West and so on ad so on..I a sure if you have to to build up Wilt you will agree to that..

If you think Wilt in your picture weighs s much as Nikola Peković then I don't know what to tell you. Wilt looked big in the day because he was plying against non weight lifting players..End of story.

Question..Did Wilt n 1964 outweigh rookie Reed by the same degree that Reed outweighed Jerry West? yes or no.

By the way I love your videos.
Well, I have 1964 video of rookie Willis Reed being cited by the commentators as weighing 245lbs though bball reference only lists 235 - so which potential rookie weight are you talking about for him?. And Jerry West weighed between 175 and 188lbs depending on the season so which version of West are we talking about? And to be certain, which version of Wilt? The only pictures/video we have of Wilt during the 1964 season are the ~290lb regular season version, because when he was overweight coming into training camp at the cited 320 (fat Wilt), he didn't have any pictures taken that I've managed to find and believe me I've looked. I mean, ultimately if your asking me do I "believe" any of these weights (or disparities between them for that matter) than yes, why shouldn't I believe them? What reasons are there to doubt them? Subjective analysis of b/w photographs? You can't really look at pics and assess how much players weigh. I will say this, Willis Reed is visibly small/short on the court compared to some of the other centers I see on film from the 1960's. He looks shorter than Bill Russell (6-9 and 5/8ths), and significantly shorter than Bellamy/Alcindor/Wilt etc. The only guy I can peg that he looks definitively taller than on film is Wes Unseld (6-7.5 w/o shoes). I'd guess Willis was probably around 6-9 and not much more. So his stocky muscular frame is a bit deceiving if looked at all by itself, just like Wilt's tall and long frame is deceiving.

[TheTenth]

Normally I'd refrain from posting in any of these arguments but I'd just like to take the time to thank Cav's for his work (His videos are probably the biggest reason why I wanted to join this site) and to hopefully point out that not everyone here is trolling on him. Being new, I don't know much about any of the members or their history of being trolls or whatever but it seems like Rake2204 is bringing up some legitimate criticisms and is trying to help. I could be wrong though.

Oh and how could anyone say that Wilt didn't weigh up to, over, or around 300 lbs. for many parts of his career when evidence clearly states that Wilt did? Cavs, I think these are the people you should probably ignore as trolls but the issues of using hyperbole may need to be considered. It's not a big deal for me, but it could help reduce the amount of trolls that visit the thread. But that's just an April 2013 poster's two cents.

[bmd]

Wilt was overweight coming into the 1963-64 season. Rapidly cutting from 320lbs day 1 of training camp to, 315lbs, to about 300lbs by the start of the regular season. Chick Hearn states during a Laker documentary made just before all-star break of that same season that Wilt then weighed precisely "292lbs". 290lbs is also the weight cited by Hank Stram (Kansas City Chiefs coach) 1 year later who worked out Wilt for a few weeks to try to get him to play football. Numerous other sources from this point forward cite Wilt's weight as typically being between no less than 275 (his official list weight at the time) to over 300lbs.

http://i.usatoday.net/communitymanager/_photos/game-on/2011/11/03/wiltx-large.jpg

This is Wilt during the "292lbs" season. Considering his stature, who are you to second guess all the information?

More information on his weight is: 1 month prior to his first ever NBA debut game, he was cited as tipping the scale at exactly 258lbs (he weighed below 240 a few seasons prior in the NCAA). His "official" rookie listed weight was 250lbs. 3 seasons later during the 1962 NBA season (his 50ppg season) he is cited as weighing 265lbs. 5 seasons into his career is when he ballooned to the 300+ (again... overweight at that time). He did cut back to 290 for a bit until filling out even more through his life-long weight lifting habits.

Your assuming all the bball reference list info of the other players he played against is accurate. It isn't any more accurate than his own bball reference list weight. Players like Wayne Embry balooned up to 270-280lbs from the 240 or w/e he was listed. Walt Bellamy is cited as 265lbs later in his career. Bill Russell, listed 215, weighed 240lbs by his final season. Petit weighed 240lbs in his later years as well, despite listing something like 210 or w/e. Most "bigs" filled out after their rookie seasons. It's a pattern that happens today too, I mean, Joakim Noah weighed 224 as a rookie you think he still weighs 224 now?Shaq weighed 300 pounds his rookie year:

http://www.thesportsmemorabiliastore.com/images/Shaq_Mgc_FT_8x10.jpg

He looks much bigger than Chamberlain did in 1963/'64:

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/1102/nba-biggest-single-season-declines/images/warriors-wilt-chamberlain-nate-thurmond.jpg

[AngelEyes]

Shaq weighed 300 pounds his rookie year:

http://www.thesportsmemorabiliastore.com/images/Shaq_Mgc_FT_8x10.jpg

He looks much bigger than Chamberlain did in 1963/'64:

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/1102/nba-biggest-single-season-declines/images/warriors-wilt-chamberlain-nate-thurmond.jpg

He actually doesn't.

[bmd]

He actually doesn't.Are you blind? He's way thicker.

[DatAsh]

Can we stop with the surgically repaired knee stuff that Wilt lovers talk about all over the internet..They constantly try to bring this up to show Wilt wasn't 100 percent. Its nonsense. Like it says the knee was REPAIRED..


A successful surgery doesn't mean your back to your old self. Even without the knee, most player decline significantly by their mid thirties.


He wasn't 300 pounds either..That campaign started when Shaq was around and Wilt fans become obsessed with trying to make it seem like Wilt was about as big as Shaq..Not even close.


Do you have anything to back this up?

[AngelEyes]

Are you blind? He's way thicker.

I've seen pictures of both players from those specific eras and the weight difference is negligible.

[CavaliersFTW]

Are you blind? He's way thicker.
You can't compare an image captured with a telephoto lens to one captured with a 50-85mm lens. Objects captured with telephoto lenses will always look more "filled out" - it's the nature of the lens not the nature of the subject. That's actually one of the primary reasons why most modern players who had a similar weight to a past player will typically look more filled out with modern photographs. Modern sports photographers benefit from zoom lenses that weren't available back then and modern athletes benefit from it because it makes them look "bigger".

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbnq6uAhhl1rhve0vo1_1280.jpg
Here's an image of rookie shaq taken with just a typical 35-50mm lens.
See the difference?

http://img.spokeo.com/public/900-600/san_dewayne_francisco_1964_12_09.jpg
Wilt with a similar focal length lens (though still actually too small in comparison), but even with the slight change now who's looking bigger?

**EDIT** here's another 1964 shot:
http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/13/35/27/3003884/15/628x471.jpg
Look how filled out his upper body is. It's not a zoom lens, so it doesn't fill players out like a modern camera would but still, you can tell his upper body was huge by that season.


My take? Knowing what I know about their measurements, and when looking at similarly captured images - 300lb Shaq as a rookie actually has a less developed upper body than 290lb Warriors Wilt and understandably so given the amount of time Wilt had spent weight lifting - and the fact that young Shaq's shoulders sat an inch or two lower on his body. But Shaq's legs were thicker - thus he weighed more even though his upper body at the time was smaller.

[Scholar]

That rim definitely doesn't look like it's 10 ft off the ground. :confusedshrug:

Either way, Wilt was a beast. I can't take that away from him. One of the great pioneers of this NBA shit...

[bmd]

You can't compare an image captured with a telephoto lens to one captured with a 50-85mm lens. Objects captured with telephoto lenses will always look more "filled out" - it's the nature of the lens not the nature of the subject. That's actually one of the primary reasons why most modern players who had a similar weight to a past player will typically look more filled out with modern photographs. Modern sports photographers benefit from zoom lenses that weren't available back then and modern athletes benefit from it because it makes them look "bigger".

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbnq6uAhhl1rhve0vo1_1280.jpg
Here's an image of rookie shaq taken with just a typical 35-50mm lens.
See the difference?

http://img.spokeo.com/public/900-600/san_dewayne_francisco_1964_12_09.jpg
Wilt with a similar focal length lens (though still actually too small in comparison), but even with the slight change now who's looking bigger?

**EDIT** here's another 1964 shot:
http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/13/35/27/3003884/15/628x471.jpg
Look how filled out his upper body is. It's not a zoom lens, so it doesn't fill players out like a modern camera would but still, you can tell his upper body was huge by that season.


My take? Knowing what I know about their measurements, and when looking at similarly captured images - 300lb Shaq as a rookie actually has a less developed upper body than 290lb Warriors Wilt and understandably so given the amount of time Wilt had spent weight lifting - and the fact that young Shaq's shoulders sat an inch or two lower on his body. But Shaq's legs were thicker - thus he weighed more even though his upper body at the time was smaller.I disagree completely. Wilt looks "strong" because he had hardly any fat on him. This made him look "ripped" even though he wasn't thick at all.

Shaq had more fat on him, making his arms look less defined. But Shaq was thicker, and had a much thicker torso and legs.

Wilt has some muscles on a lanky frame. Shaq is solid all over.

[CavaliersFTW]

http://education.niksoftware.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/00-Lens-comparison-1.jpeg

Example of what I'm talking about with all this focal length talk.

Sports photography in the Shaq era = 300-800mm zoom lenses.

In the Wilt era it = 35-200mm zoom lenses.

The amount of visual "filling out" it does on the athletes is substantial - and image comparisons of players "then vs now" can't really be made unless this is understood. Very rarely am I lucky enough to even find comparably shot photographs between the eras. There seem to be very few examples of overlap in the focal length of lenses from the 60's to the 90's/'00's/'10's. It's not until the 70's that I noticed higher more comparable-to-modern zoom lenses started to be used.

[bmd]

http://education.niksoftware.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/00-Lens-comparison-1.jpeg

Example of what I'm talking about with all this focal length talk.

Sports photography in the Shaq era = 300-800mm zoom lenses.

In the Wilt era it = 35-200mm zoom lenses.

The amount of visual "filling out" it does on the athletes is substantial - and image comparisons of players "then vs now" can't really be made unless this is understood. Very rarely am I lucky enough to even find comparably shot photographs between the eras. There seem to be very few examples of overlap in the focal length of lenses from the 60's to the 90's/'00's/'10's. It's not until the 70's that I noticed higher more comparable-to-modern zoom lenses started to be used.Even Wilt at his biggest when he was on the Lakers never looked bigger than 300 pound Shaq.

[DatAsh]

Wilt looks a lot more muscular than Shaq, especially so in his later years.

[bmd]

Wilt looks a lot more muscular than Shaq, especially so in his later years.No, he looks more ripped. There is a difference.

[CavaliersFTW]

Even Wilt at his biggest when he was on the Lakers never looked bigger than 300 pound Shaq.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8LHD3s7-w48/UEa4VWs1xuI/AAAAAAAADlo/vYimbewa8TE/s800/Sequence%252001.Still001.jpg

lol c'mon now

[DatAsh]

No, he looks more ripped. There is a difference.

A lot of it depends on the picture. Shaq looks bigger in the picute you posted; Wilt looks bigger in the picture Cavs posted.

[AngelEyes]

http://youtu.be/XNw0c19DhIU 15:20

Look how big Wilt looks here and this is 1965, only a year later. Dude looks really filled out in his upper body.

[AngelEyes]

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8LHD3s7-w48/UEa4VWs1xuI/AAAAAAAADlo/vYimbewa8TE/s800/Sequence%252001.Still001.jpg

lol c'mon now

He looks like he's easily 300+ pounds here.

[bmd]

http://youtu.be/XNw0c19DhIU

Look how big Wilt looks here and this is 1965, only a year later. Dude looks really filled out in his upper body.That whole video is stretched wide.

[bmd]

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8LHD3s7-w48/UEa4VWs1xuI/AAAAAAAADlo/vYimbewa8TE/s800/Sequence%252001.Still001.jpg

lol c'mon nowShow me the video where that was capped from.

[TheTenth]

That whole video is stretched wide.
Oh so the differences in picture/video quality only applies when it helps Wilt? They aught to put "bmd" as a synonym of confirmation bias in the thesaurus.

[bmd]

Wanna know how I know your picture is bullshit? Here:

http://i42.tinypic.com/ndn5h5.jpg


Those lines are the exact same size. The horizontal line fits perfect along the ball, while the vertical line is well beyond the ball... showing that the picture is stretched wide.

To make Wilt look bigger than he is.

[CavaliersFTW]

That whole video is stretched wide.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-xwY6YtbPeZk/UYMW3QcuUrI/AAAAAAAAETw/vBdTO7l4U2M/s800/Fixed.jpg
here you go princess, fixed the aspect ratio just for you...

[bmd]

Oh so the differences in picture/video quality only applies when it helps Wilt? They aught to put "bmd" as a synonym of confirmation bias in the thesaurus.Umm ... no. This has nothing to do with video quality and everything to do with youtube stretching a video to fit a widescreen frame.

There should be black bars on each side of the video for accurate representation.

[AngelEyes]

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-xwY6YtbPeZk/UYMW3QcuUrI/AAAAAAAAETw/vBdTO7l4U2M/s800/Fixed.jpg
here you go princess, fixed the aspect ratio just for you...

Guy still looks huge.

[TheTenth]

Umm ... no. This has nothing to do with video quality and everything to do with youtube stretching a video to fit a widescreen frame.

There should be black bars on each side of the video for accurate representation.
Yes but you look for technology reasons (the stretching of a youtube video) as reasons for Wilt's larger size but fail to realize that works in favor of Shaq in other pictures and videos. A perfect example of confirmation bias.

[bmd]

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-xwY6YtbPeZk/UYMW3QcuUrI/AAAAAAAAETw/vBdTO7l4U2M/s800/Fixed.jpg
here you go princess, fixed the aspect ratio just for you...It still isn't correct:

http://i40.tinypic.com/35mp2ld.jpg

[bmd]

Yes but you look for technology reasons (the stretching of a youtube video) as reasons for Wilt's larger size but fail to realize that works in favor of Shaq in other pictures and videos. A perfect example of confirmation bias.How do you figure that? I never said anything about the difference in technology between the eras.

[Psileas]

He looks like he's easily 300+ pounds here.

Also here, at 19:25-19:35, and I don't know whether this is Wilt at his heaviest as a player:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaXHYlPECcc

[TheTenth]

How do you figure that? I never said anything about the difference in technology between the eras.

That's the point. When presented first with evidence that camera lens quality makes a difference in the visual aspect of how a player looks you respond with this... completely ignoring the evidence.


I disagree completely. Wilt looks "strong" because he had hardly any fat on him. This made him look "ripped" even though he wasn't thick at all.

Shaq had more fat on him, making his arms look less defined. But Shaq was thicker, and had a much thicker torso and legs.

Wilt has some muscles on a lanky frame. Shaq is solid all over.

Evidence is then presented again how the lens can make a difference. You ignore it once again.


Even Wilt at his biggest when he was on the Lakers never looked bigger than 300 pound Shaq.

However, a stretched Chamberlain photo is posted and you post this.


Wanna know how I know your picture is bullshit? Here:

Those lines are the exact same size. The horizontal line fits perfect along the ball, while the vertical line is well beyond the ball... showing that the picture is stretched wide.

To make Wilt look bigger than he is.

According to sciencedaily.com: Confirmation bias is a phenomenon wherein decision makers have been shown to actively seek out and assign more weight to evidence that confirms their hypothesis, and ignore or underweigh evidence that could disconfirm their hypothesis.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/c/confirmation_bias.htm#ZZhoupxs93G6Cou8.99

Alot of people (including myself) fall into this trap. I believe you have done the same.

[avonbarksdale]

you are easily one of the worst posters here literally no one but you cares how tall wilt was or how tall anyone else was compared to wilt

[bmd]

I took the liberty of fixing the photo for you guys:

http://i43.tinypic.com/15d1rc.jpg


Thank me whenever you'd like.

Compare it to the bull he was originally trying to pass off:

http://i42.tinypic.com/ndn5h5.jpg

[bmd]

That's the point. When presented first with evidence that camera lens quality makes a difference in the visual aspect of how a player looks you respond with this... completely ignoring the evidence.



Evidence is then presented again how the lens can make a difference. You ignore it once again.



However, a stretched Chamberlain photo is posted and you post this.



According to sciencedaily.com: Confirmation bias is a phenomenon wherein decision makers have been shown to actively seek out and assign more weight to evidence that confirms their hypothesis, and ignore or underweigh evidence that could disconfirm their hypothesis.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/c/confirmation_bias.htm#ZZhoupxs93G6Cou8.99

Alot of people (including myself) fall into this trap. I believe you have done the same.I never denied anything having to do with a camera lens. I accepted that it is a possibility.

CaveliersFTW stated that in Wilt's later years, they did use camera's similar to Shaq's earlier years... which is why I stated even 300 pound Shaq looked bigger than Lakers Wilt.

So I did address the issue. I assumed what he said is fact, and made the point that Wilt at his biggest, in his later years, never looked bigger than 300 pound Shaq.

A stretched photograph is just straight-up disingenuous.

And I know what conformation bias is. I have no dog in the fight. I tell it like I see it.

CavaliersFTW, however, is a huge Wilt fan. If anybody has bias, it is him.

And this is evidenced by the fact he is using stretched photos of Wilt, and deceitful photos of Wilt in his original post saying he is as high as the backboard.

[TheTenth]

I never denied anything having to do with a camera lens. I accepted that it is a possibility.

CaveliersFTW stated that in Wilt's later years, they did use camera's similar to Shaq's earlier years... which is why I stated even 300 pound Shaq looked bigger than Lakers Wilt.

So I did address the issue. I assumed what he said is fact, and made the point that Wilt at his biggest, in his later years, never looked bigger than 300 pound Shaq.

A stretched photograph is just straight-up disingenuous.

And I know what conformation bias is. I have no dog in the fight. I tell it like I see it.

CavaliersFTW, however, is a huge Wilt fan. If anybody has bias, it is him.

And this is evidenced by the fact he is using stretched photos of Wilt, and deceitful photos of Wilt in his original post saying he is as high as the backboard.
Ah I misunderstood your reasoning for saying Wilt in his later years never looked that big. You did indeed address the issue there and missed the context of your statement. However, your thesis is still wrong. Wilt has been recorded many times being near or above 300 lbs. and there is no need to believe those sources as being falsified. Even in the accurate picture he is still HUGE.

I will respond to your facetious plee to be thanked with genuine gratitude - thank you. Maybe I should look at cav's post with a more critical attitude.

[LAZERUSS]

How about these...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STXbuXGPdoY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrpmGuCmGnc

[bmd]

Check it out... I pulled some newspaper articles from the archives:

1963, Wilt is 250 pounds:

http://oi42.tinypic.com/cu61h.jpg



1970, Wilt is 275 pounds (bottom of page):

http://oi41.tinypic.com/301q6as.jpg

[TheTenth]

Check it out... I pulled some newspaper articles from the archives:

1963, Wilt is 250 pounds:

1970, Wilt is 275 pounds (bottom of page):


The first thing that pops out to me could be that they are estimates based on older records. Doesn't it seem a bit odd that they are both at 1/2 and 3/4 of a hundred? Neither are from Chamberlain's "home city" and could definitely be just running on old information which they round to a psychologically satisfying number. It could very easily be an estimate of some sort, something that can be done without research and just used use as a quick example of size. That's not compelling evidence at all.

[bmd]

The first thing that pops out to me could be that they are estimates based on older records. Doesn't it seem a bit odd that they are both at 1/2 and 3/4 of a hundred? It could very easily be an estimate of some sort, something that can be done without research and just used use as a quick example of size. That's not compelling evidence at all.Then what is reliable?

[PHILA]

Lol. They playing with low rims. GTFO with that weak era shit.

Look at how high his release point is on this hook shot. It doesn't look like much until you notice where the rim is. He is almost shooting it down into the basket. In the screenshot the ball is just a split second from leaving his hand. If he was getting the ball up high enough to dunk on his hook shots, it's no wonder he had a near unblockable shot. You had to rely more on timing than the challenging his vertical game.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wsEE9oivvM&t=14m38s




http://i.imgur.com/msssnZn.png

http://i.imgur.com/jyep7B8.png

[bmd]

The first thing that pops out to me could be that they are estimates based on older records. Doesn't it seem a bit odd that they are both at 1/2 and 3/4 of a hundred? Neither are from Chamberlain's "home city" and could definitely be just running on old information which they round to a psychologically satisfying number. It could very easily be an estimate of some sort, something that can be done without research and just used use as a quick example of size. That's not compelling evidence at all.I'm not sure about that, because I saw other articles saying 280, 265, etc. depending on the date.

[bmd]

Look at how high his release point is on this hook shot. It doesn't look like much until you notice where the rim is. He is almost shooting it down into the basket. In the screenshot the ball is just a split second from leaving his hand. If he was getting the ball up high enough to dunk on his hook shots, it's no wonder he had a near unblockable shot. You had to rely more on timing than the challenging his vertical game.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wsEE9oivvM&t=14m38s




http://i.imgur.com/msssnZn.png

http://i.imgur.com/jyep7B8.pngI can't make out a thing in that photo. I don't even see where Wilt is.

[TheTenth]

Then what is reliable?
That's a good question. It would be nice to see some sources that provide evidence of Wilt weighing over 300 lbs. and trying to see if/how hard it would be to reject the evidence. It's kind of like the null hypothesis/alternative hypothesis used in Statistics courses. I'm sure Lazerruss has a whole list of sources he can provide for the Wilt > 300 lbs. argument :lol

[CavaliersFTW]

Spent the past 4+ hours of my life searching. Couldn't find a single example of focal length overlap of Lakers Wilt and rookie Shaq. This is the ABSOLUTE CLOSEST thing I could find - and it is at least double the focal distance off. Now your welcome to all search for examples of similar focal length images for a revisit.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-WyCG5jdVpww/UYMsNU3AJwI/AAAAAAAAEUM/UPjeYRQXjaw/s800/Wilt%2520Shaq%25201.jpg

Now keeping in mind:
http://education.niksoftware.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/00-Lens-comparison-1.jpeg

Shaq is actually relatively more filled out in that image than Wilt is and still looks ultimately smaller (at least, his upper body does). Now keep in mind that virtually every image you've ever seen of Wilt from his playing career is 200mm or less in zoom (usually only 35-100mm actually), and virtually every image you've ever seen of Shaq is telephoto (400-800mm). Like I said, Wilts upper body appears to be where his mass lies where as "300lb" Shaq's lower body is where his mass lies. Shaq is bulkier than Wilt in his legs. And that's it early in his career. The images your all are accustomed to combing through, do NOT equally portray both players.

Further:
From the 1964 pre-season.
http://i.imgur.com/nLUnL.png

I'm sure Jlauber or Phila has the link to the other newspapers that cited him at 320lbs from a newspaper clipping a few days prior, and down to 300lbs a few weeks later. I have on video, Chick Hearn describing Wilt at 292lbs later into that season. Post-retirement in 1984, Wilt tipped the scale at 327lbs, I'll gladly dig up the image with the text that indicates so. Now cut the hyper-analysis crap BMD, your trying to create distrust and hyper-criticality on this subject, when it has already been well established in past discussions on this board that my research, and others about the sizes of players back then is sound. And as soon as I post an image of Wilt with a distorted aspect ratio you automatically jump on me and accuse me of doing it "on purpose". Come on man, your just being an asshole at this point and you know it. I'm sure you'll attempt to hyper analyze the images I posted as well - or the logic behind how focal length effects the volume of a subject - trying to find some inherent flaw. Good luck.

[bmd]

Spent the past 4+ hours of my life searching. Couldn't find a single example of focal length overlap of Lakers Wilt and rookie Shaq. This is the ABSOLUTE CLOSEST thing I could find - and it is at least double the focal distance off. Now your welcome to all search for examples of similar focal length images for a revisit.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-WyCG5jdVpww/UYMsNU3AJwI/AAAAAAAAEUM/UPjeYRQXjaw/s800/Wilt%2520Shaq%25201.jpg

Now keeping in mind:
http://education.niksoftware.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/00-Lens-comparison-1.jpeg

Shaq is actually relatively more filled out in that image than Wilt is and still looks ultimately smaller (at least, his upper body does). Now keep in mind that virtually every image you've ever seen of Wilt from his playing career is 200mm or less in zoom (usually only 35-100mm actually), and virtually every image you've ever seen of Shaq is telephoto (400-800mm). Like I said, Wilts upper body appears to be where his mass lies where as "300lb" Shaq's lower body is where his mass lies. Shaq is bulkier than Wilt in his legs. And that's it early in his career. The images your all are accustomed to combing through, do NOT equally portray both players.

Further:
From the 1964 pre-season.
http://i.imgur.com/nLUnL.png

I'm sure Jlauber or Phila has the link to the other newspapers that cited him at 320lbs from a newspaper clipping a few days prior, and down to 300lbs a few weeks later. I have on video, Chick Hearn describing Wilt at 292lbs later into that season. Post-retirement in 1984, Wilt tipped the scale at 327lbs, I'll gladly dig up the image with the text that indicates so. Now cut the hyper-analysis crap BMD, your trying to create distrust and hyper-criticality on this subject, when it has already been well established in past discussions on this board that my research, and others about the sizes of players back then is sound. And as soon as I post an image of Wilt with a distorted aspect ratio you automatically jump on me and accuse me of doing it "on purpose". Come on man, your just being an asshole at this point and you know it. I'm sure you'll attempt to hyper analyze the images I posted as well - or the logic behind how focal length effects the volume of a subject - trying to find some inherent flaw. Good luck.How do you know that Wilt picture is 200mm and the Shaq picture is 400mm?

Also, can you post the link to the original photos?

[millwad]

Are there actually any footage or pics of Wilt having head around the rim?

[jongib369]

http://cache1.asset-cache.net/gc/158861431-former-nba-great-wilt-chamberlain-talks-with-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QSIQ%2fgqo7cw4A9XpD2LlaiIYpD A%2bLvZg8i0owYTo5tXCsJIZjyXi%2bp90P%2bzLG0UXCw%3d% 3d

[tommyhtc]

guys this thread along with all other threads on wilt are fantastic.
they really are what define insidehoops, we don't see these types of posts anywhere else.

we get on one side passionate old timers who defend classic players by any means

and guys who try to discredit the old school players.

and none of these posts are by any trolls either. keep it up!

[Euroleague]

.875/.125=7

Well played sir.

[bmd]

:oldlol:

http://www.lobshots.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/wilt-speedo.jpg

[fpliii]

I had a few minutes free this morning, so I did some quick ProQuest searches for relevant articles. Here's the link:

http://www9.zippyshare.com/v/79675448/file.html

I have the most of the Media Guides at home, so I'll take a look when I get back from work.

[avonbarksdale]

you are THE worst poster here stop making these threads

[bmd]

I had a few minutes free this morning, so I did some quick ProQuest searches for relevant articles. Here's the link:

http://www9.zippyshare.com/v/79675448/file.html

I have the most of the Media Guides at home, so I'll take a look when I get back from work.So I found newspaper articles saying he weighed as low as 250. You find some saying he weighed as much as 320.

Sounds like people back then were just guessing when they wrote their articles.

I mean, just looking at that goofy picture of Wilt in the speedo at the top of this page, you can see right away that there is no way in hell that he weighed anywhere near 320.

[fpliii]

So I found newspaper articles saying he weighed as low as 250. You find some saying he weighed as much as 320.

Sounds like people back then were just guessing when they wrote their articles.

I mean, just looking at that goofy picture of Wilt in the speedo at the top of this page, you can see right away that there is no way in hell that he weighed anywhere near 320.

Eh, you can choose to believe what you want, as will I. I won't make definitive statements, and don't really go for speculation such as the bolded (BTW where are your articles? I haven't been keeping track of the arguments in this thread, so I don't know if you've posted extensive support for your case). Personally, I'm not a big Wilt guy, but I'm confident in my current stance.

[bmd]

Eh, you can choose to believe what you want, as will I. I won't make definitive statements, and don't really go for speculation such as the bolded (BTW where are your articles? I haven't been keeping track of the arguments in this thread, so I don't know if you've posted extensive support for your case). Personally, I'm not a big Wilt guy, but I'm confident in my current stance.Page 9... just 1 page back.

[fpliii]

Page 9... just 1 page back.

Ah okay, thanks.

Both of those could very well be correct (they seem like off-the-cuff comments, but a few of mine do as well). There are only two periods of time during which I'm certain Wilt approached the heavier weights, from what I can tell:

[LAZERUSS]

Ah okay, thanks.

Both of those could very well be correct (they seem like off-the-cuff comments, but a few of mine do as well). There are only two periods of time during which I'm certain Wilt approached the heavier weights, from what I can tell:

• 1963-64 (especially towards the end of the year) and the first half of 1964-65 (he was out of shape before training camp for that season)
• Towards the end of his time in LA (definitely 71-72 and 72-73)

I don't think he approached peak Shaq's weight (330+) during the season at any point of his career, though from my understanding he was certainly approaching (and possibly at) 300lbs during the above two periods (during which, I'm sure not coincidently, he played some of his best defense, although he doesn't seem to have been anywhere as mobile).

Thanks fpliii. You are an extremely valuable resource.

I don't think there was any question that Chamberlain weighed over 300 lbs at times in his career. Just google a 300 lb Wilt, and the links are damn near endless (obviously many of them use the same sources.)

Without looking up the link, I believe Chamberlain supposedly weighed 327 lbs during the filming of "Conan the Barberian."

http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_kp0leb7nL51qz6z0no1_1280.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId =AKIAI6WLSGT7Y3ET7ADQ&Expires=1367688421&Signature=SYST4IeKBkcev7hWdQ0b1z1vR5I%3D#_=_

Here is another...

http://i48.tinypic.com/mk9pts.jpg


And long after Wilt retired, take a look at this interview. I a not sure how much Russell weighed at the time, but he is puny sitting next to Wilt...(BTW...look at Wilt's arms at about the 1:30 mark)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=173M7ApCNKw

[LAZERUSS]

And once again, the internet is just plastered with irst hand accounts of Wilt's enormous strength. I could list link-after-link, but there is no need. By most accounts, Chamberlain was considered one of the strongest athletes in the world at the time he played, and even well after.

Ali weighed about 220 lbs during this interview...and he looks like a small child standing next to Chamberlain...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcM0Dib1TLQ

[ILLsmak]

Look at all those fat, 5'10 white guys. I would not be surprised if that rim was at 8'5:facepalm

haha, I was thinking the same thing.

-Smak

[LAZERUSS]

And once again, I get a kick out of these Wilt detractors, who go out of their way to dismiss what has been almost universally accepted.

Of course they will believe an article which quotes Wilt's weight at 250 lbs (which was actually less than his rookie weight of nearly 260), but they won't believe first-hand accunts by the likes of Sonny Hill and Al Domenico who claimed to have witnessed Chamberlain touching the top of the backboard. Nor will they accept Tex Winter claiming that a high school Wilt could take three steps from behind the FT line, and leap from the line, and dunk a basketball. In fact, he was so shocked by that he headed a committee which banned that "freakish activity." Nor the comments from Arnold Schwartenzegger who actually worked out with Wilt, and was just stunned by his enormous strength. Or Robert Cherry interviewing a well-known weight-lifter, who was capable of benching 500 lbs, claiming that Wilt could curl 110 lb dumbells like you or I would pick up a telephone. Or an MSNBC interview in 1997, in which the host claimed that he witnessed a 59 year old Chamberlain working out, and bench-pressing 465 lbs.

Just Google Wilt's strength. There is a never-ending supply of articles which mention his god-like strength.

We have some outstanding video footage, which clearly shows the amazing leaping ability of a Chamberlain, who, BTW, was also a college high-jump champion (and doing so part-time, and with poor technique.)

I just don't get it. First the anti-Wilt clan demanded footage and sources. Then, when they begin to appear all over the place, they then question those. If Wilt were alive today, and came to their house, and jumped over a 13 ft backboard, they still wouldn't believe it.

Once again, where are the first-hand legitimate sources that dispute the athletic accomplishments of Wilt? Of all of the thousands, and perhaps millions, of those that witnessed Wilt in his lifetime...where are those that would dispute his leaping ability, strength, and speed?

[bmd]

And once again, I get a kick out of these Wilt detractors, who go out of their way to dismiss what has been almost universally accepted.

Of course they will believe an article which quotes Wilt's weight at 250 lbs (which was actually less than his rookie weight of nearly 260), but they won't believe first-hand accunts by the likes of Sonny Hill and Al Domenico who claimed to have witnessed Chamberlain touching the top of the backboard. Nor will they accept Tex Winter claiming that a high school Wilt could take three steps from behind the FT line, and leap from the line, and dunk a basketball. In fact, he was so shocked by that he headed a committee which banned that "freakish activity." Nor the comments from Arnold Schwartenzegger who actually worked out with Wilt, and was just stunned by his enormous strength. Or Robert Cherry interviewing a well-known weight-lifter, who was capable of benching 500 lbs, claiming that Wilt could curl 110 lb dumbells like you or I would pick up a telephone. Or an MSNBC interview in 1997, in which the host claimed that he witnessed a 59 year old Chamberlain working out, and bench-pressing 465 lbs.

Just Google Wilt's strength. There is a never-ending supply of articles which mention his god-like strength.

We have some outstanding video footage, which clearly shows the amazing leaping ability of a Chamberlain, who, BTW, was also a college high-jump champion (and doing so part-time, and with poor technique.)

I just don't get it. First the anti-Wilt clan demanded footage and sources. Then, when they begin to appear all over the place, they then question those. If Wilt were alive today, and came to their house, and jumped over a 13 ft backboard, they still wouldn't believe it.

Once again, where are the first-hand legitimate sources that dispute the athletic accomplishments of Wilt? Of all of the thousands, and perhaps millions, of those that witnessed Wilt in his lifetime...where are those that would dispute his leaping ability, strength, and speed?I never believe these accounts. People always say good things about their friends and legends grow and get exaggerated over time.

[Psileas]

Then what is reliable?

When quoting a newspaper about a player's weight, it's one thing to quote an article whose main content or a good part of it is exactly this (= a player's weight or physical condition) and another to quote an article that just offers some piece of info for secondary reasons, while its main content isn't the player's weight.

So, if an article specifically claims that Wilt reported at 305 lbs in the 1970 pre-season (random choices of numbers) and another article focuses on a 1970 game of Wilt and, among else, mentions as secondary info a weight number that is left unsourced and is probably just based on popular but older or sometimes much older sources, which article is more likely to be closer to the truth? I don't know about you, but if I was responsible for a paper whose reporter claimed that Wilt reported at 305 lbs, but he was 275 instead, the reporter would be in trouble...Similarly, if an article claimed Moses Malone reported in 1983 at 265 lbs, then you look at basketball-reference and see him listed at 215, which source will you believe?

[LAZERUSS]

I never believe these accounts. People always say good things about their friends and legends grow and get exaggerated over time.

So you are basically only going to believe what you want to believe in then, right? No matter the overwhelming amount of evidence, nor the credibility of the many that made these claims.

I suppose you also would question these "myths", as well.

Like Wilt scoring 100 points in one game. Or averaging 50 ppg in one season. Or averaging 40 ppg over the course of his first seven seasons, combined. Or having six of the ten 70+ point games in NBA history (and the other four were accomplished by four different players.) Or Chamberlain having 32 of the 62 60+ point games in NBA history (and the next best players, MJ and Kobe, are tied with five.) Hell, a 32 year old Wilt supposedly had games of 60 and 66 points.

No way Wilt could have grabbed 55 rebounds in one game (and against Russell BTW.) Or a playoff record 41 (again, against Russell.) Or having 15 of the 28 40+ rebound games in NBA history. Or averaging 27.2 rpg, and 27.0 rpg in two consecutive seasons. Or playing in 13 post-seasons, and his lowest post-season average was 20.2 rpg, and with post-seasons of 29 and 30 rpg. Or playing in 29 post-season series, and never being outrebounded in any of them. Or having three post-season series in which he averaged 30, 31, and 32 rpg (and all of them against Russell.)

And only a complete fool would believe that Wilt had the three highest perfect games from the field in NBA history (15-15, 16-16, and 18-18), along with two of 18-19 . Or that Wilt made 35 straight FGAs in one stretch of his career. Or that Chamberlain has the two highest FG% seasons in NBA (.727 and .683), and in eras when the league shot between .441 and .456.

Shot-blocking? Some moron by the name of Harvey Pollack claimed that Wilt had entire seasons of 10+. There are sites which credit Wilt with many games of 20+, and even a few of 30+. And Sports Illustrated ran an article on a nationally televised game, in which it claimed that Wilt blocked 23 shots. Who would believe that? There is even footage that someone faked, in which a 35 year old Wilt is blocking two straight sky-hooks, in the air, by Kareem. Oh, and in just seven of their 28 h2h games, the statisticians credited Chamberlain with blocking 30 of Kareem's shots.

Who could possibly believe that Chamberlain could have ever have led the NBA in scoring, rebounding, and FG%, in the same season...much less three times? Or that Wilt, a center for cryingoutloud, would have led the league in assists? Or that Wilt would have two straight post-season series in which he averaged 20+ ppg, 20+ rpg, and 10+ apg?

And thanks to fpliii we have sources which credit Wilt with the following:


http://www.nbastats.net/

Career 30-30 games:

Aside from Chamberlain, there have been 36 30-30 games in NBA history, and Russell is the leader of that group, with 7 (Bellamy and Thurmond are next with 3 each.)

How about Wilt? 132.


40-30 (or 30-40) games: Other than Wilt, the NBA has had 9 40-30 games, with Baylor being the only player to have 2.

Chamberlain? 73


50-30 games: Pettit and Baylor each with 1

Wilt? 32


60-20 games: Aside from Wilt, there have been four (Baylor with 3 and Shaq with 1)

Chamberlain? 28


60-30 games: Baylor with 1

Wilt? 8


40-40 games: There have been 8 in the history of the NBA, and Chamberlain had all of them.


50-40 games: Obviously, Wilt would be the only player to have ever have accomplsihed that feat, which he did 5 times.


70-30 games: Chamberlain has the only 2, 78-43 and 73-36 (against Bellamy.)

Of course, who in their right mind would believe anything from these "sources", who supposedly and pain-stakingly went thru newspaper archives to dig up this packet of lies.


Thank god we have posters like yourself, who have obviously researched Wilt's career, and have conclusive proof that all of it was a sham.