Limb Lengthening Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length  (Read 1299 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« on: August 10, 2020, 03:17:21 PM »

Hello,

So, the guy appearing at the middle is a rapper who makes millions of dollars if any of you don't recognize him, his nickname is 6ix9ine.
He is listed at 162cm tall on celebheights.com which is highly possible.

So, I want you all to check this picture and realise how tall people are usually gain the height from the legs rather than a torso,
https://imgur.com/a/rdEsO2W

Their torso look almost the same, If not; still If 6ix9ine was as tall as the right guy, it wouldn't even look bad at all. The right guy is like  188cm or 193cm as far as I remember, I've checked it before but I cannot remember his name or anything, I couldn't double-check.

Has anyone got ideas about the right guy's LBR deviation ? he gets a +2 from me. If you don't get what I mean, chick these images that I stole from an article.
https://imgur.com/a/Z6xAzsW

Please tell me your opinion, it's important. I'm talking about the guy's deviation from the chart.

Best Regards

edit: I cropped the picture, now you can only see the leg differences by models. There were other stuff like arm length etc I cropped em out.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2020, 04:22:50 PM by a »
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2020, 03:24:03 PM »

What I talked about might seem un-understandable but it's actually easy to understand. Check the picture where there are human models, check the middle section, the middle guy has 0 deviation which is an average proportional body as leg/torso, and when you go to the right it gets +1 +2 and +3, when you go to the opposite way it's -1, -2 and -3.

+2 means that he has long legs, and a shortish torso. So, the black guy at the right looks like a +2 maybe a +3 which means he has incredibly long legs.
You may check the ratios at the chart that I posted.

Best Regards
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2020, 07:12:24 PM »

up
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+

ghkid2019

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 930
  • Inactive account
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2020, 07:38:05 PM »

Black people have small torso and long legs. Tekashi is definitely not 5'4 either
Logged
This account is no longer in use.

User requested self-ban.

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2020, 08:06:09 PM »

Might be, can you make a quick math with me which might lead us to my hypothetical future proportions?

My sitting height now is 90cm at peak. Let's take it.
I heard that absolute low sh/h ratio would be 0.485, if we make the math for it, we'll get the result of 185.6xxx, which means I can pull off 185.5cm with a kind of short sitting height (I actually take it as torso length too. Because my neck and head are average sized, it just helps calculating.)

There is a second option, if we do the math (90/0.49) we get the result of 183.6 cm which I can pull off with a slightly short torso.
And my armspan is 181cms, so do you think these numbers sound cool? I know there are other requirements, tibia length femur length their ratio bla bla bla. I know. I'm just speaking overall.

And I think If i become 183cm, I'll be a +2 standart deviation, do you think +2 would look too bad or is it even decent at +3 somehow ?

Best Regards
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #5 on: August 11, 2020, 06:54:55 PM »

up
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+

deletedaccount

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #6 on: August 11, 2020, 07:01:36 PM »

Sounds like you can shoot for 6 foot no problem
Logged

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #7 on: August 11, 2020, 08:18:32 PM »

Sounds like you can shoot for 6 foot no problem

Thank you so much for your reply!
Also you got the best forumname btw.

Anyway, I wanted to ask which of the deviations do you think would occur when I be 183cm? I think i'll be a +2, If i get to 185cms i'll still be a +2 or a +3 I guess.
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+

deletedaccount

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #8 on: August 12, 2020, 06:28:33 AM »

Thanks  8)

At 183 you'll be about -1.5 SD of SH and at 185 nearer -2 but not quite there so that's not bad at all. Are we considering your peak height as well as sitting height? I think midday (89 cm for you?) should be more accurate since you can't hold the peak height for very long.

Measuring sitting height is also a little dodgy, I started out thinking I had an 83 cm sitting height measuring on the floor with aerosol, but it inhibited my posture when doing that and the can wasn't big enough, then ended up with a bigger can and flat surface and bigger can thinking 85 cm even though eyeballing it I got a very varying measure 85-89 something, finally using a stadiometer on a big flat table turns out it's a comfortable 87 cm midday.
Logged

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #9 on: August 12, 2020, 03:04:41 PM »

Hello,

Thanks for the time reserved, this day has been very tough (I was in school, with masks and stuff) and I'm too tired now. I'll measure my sitting height in some time and let you know the result.
Also can you please tell me what kind of a measurement should I use in order to get the LBR ratio accurate enough? Is it my inseam length/ my torso or (full height - sitting height) / height? I'm not really sure.

Best Regards
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+

deletedaccount

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #10 on: August 12, 2020, 03:22:08 PM »

Inseam to height is reasonable but the most accurate way would be to just get an x-ray when you're about to get LL done
Logged

a

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 568
  • 5'9
Re: Seems like we shouldn't worry about torso length
« Reply #11 on: August 12, 2020, 03:22:24 PM »

I just measured my sitting height again, it's like 90cm I guess. The lowest would be 89cm, usually 90cm mid day, never measured my SH as soon as I wake up anyway so I think it's accurate.
Logged
height: 174-5 at night
wingspan: 180+
Pages: [1]   Go Up