Chaps

The wife is away, and with more time on my hands I have been pondering the fallibility of the "out of ten" rating we all use in our heads to grade women. Here is the problem. On the usual scale, a lot of true good lookers have to be shovelled into the 7+ category with the occasional .5's being stuck in or deducted for various reasons. The reason is that we waste a lot of the lower numbers on stinkers who in reality, we never rank out of ten anyway. How many times have you walked past an old bird, or some fat stinker with a face like a roofer's kneecap and thought "i'd give her 2 out of 10"? Never I bet. So it needs some reorganisation and here is my suggesiton;

The scale is is still out of ten, but 1/10 is the entry level at which you would fuck her. Any bird you would not shag does not get on the list and therefore is zero ("Out of 10, I'd give her one" as we Brits like to say). You then have a vast scale available to rate each chick you see without having to resort to .5s and the like. I road tested it today and once I got used to the fact that a previous 6/10 and perfectly acceptable shag was on the new list a 3-4 at best, I was sold. Not seen any 9 or 10's but I expect to next week at work wondering around.

I did find myself musing on one girl for quite a while because I could not quite decide if she was a 5,6, or 7. Seriously, about 30 minutes of effort over a can of bear on that one. When I plumped on 5 for the various reasons I almost felt like going and telling her the result and the reasons I was so pleased with myself.....

.......yes, I am bored today! Sorry. But I think this is the way forward.

[ Last edited by  akka at 19-4-2009 22:45 ]

  you have too much time on your hands akka!  When does the SO return?

1 week - funny enough I thought I would be shagging my cock off every day and I've shagged anything yet through totallack of trying as well. As on my school report card....must try harder.

You should scrath that itch before it becomes a rash! All those WG's and only one little bro!

Ingenious! Nice read there akka. Thanks for that, lol.

LOL good system

I prefer counting down though. I generally use a "shot level" as in how many alcohol shots would it take for me to do her.

Any girl between before 2 shots is decently hot. And it goes downhill until you hit "dead drunk on the floor" level.

There are a few factors at work here:

1. relative ranking -- it's always hard ti give someone a 10 because you never know if you're going to meet a better one tomorrow. this is illustrated pretty well in ebay ratings. people rate sellers as AAAAA+++++++ because they used up AAA+++ already on someone not quite as good.
2. social pressure -- it's insulting to rate a woman too low. it's embarrassing (or potentially dangerous) to do so if it may get back to her and you have to face her again.
3. defacto standards -- it's tough replacing an implicitly understood system with one that looks the same but has been normalized to only score what used to be between 7 and 10... without units, it's hard to tell which system is being used when you're rating a girl. Regardless of whether you're cold enough to give a pretty girl a rating of zero, it would still be unclear what you mean.

I think the tried and true 1 to 10, or the modified 0 to 5 we use here is fine. If you want to change the rules, I'd suggest doing so by creating some new units of beauty. Maybe something like helens (you know, the amount of beauty required to launch a 1000 ships ). Even that it problematic. Everyone on the planet knows the existing system, you haven't changed it enough to solve the basic problem, and introduced a new problem in the process.

-G

GARY

This isn't for this forum more for every day use. You would never give a pretty girl a zero on the basis that if you would fuck her she is at least a 1/10.
It is rare you would tell someone you pass iin the street her ranking so no problem therem
As regards differentiating between the old antiquated scheme and this one, I will call it.......

Akka's Revolutionary Syncapated Evaluation method....... ARSE for short.

The major benefit of the ARSE method is when those hot girls who know theyr are hot ask you what you think of them
You can egitimately give them a bubble popping 5/10.....

I'm not sure I see the point. Your new system doesn't seem to add much value. You're rating women from 1-10, when the defacto system has active range of 5-10. Plus the old system has the benefit of everybody knowing what you're talking about!

If you want more gradation you can add a decimal place to the old system and everyone will still understand what you're talking about.

But don't let me stop you, I just think you haven't offered a compelling reason to switch and you're going to confuse most people.

-G

I think while it's all well and good to have a system in place - the fact of the matter is, the actual rating or scoring remains very subjective.

Until you can work out a way of making the actual scoring more 'scientific' or objective, the scale employed in a system is moot.

Ok max a good point. I am on the ferry so will try to put into words how it could and should be more objective;


Max score is ten points so therefore we can easily have 5 categories with a max score of two on each. 0 points for not at all, 1 point for maybe and 2 for yes.
A girl scoring full points in all classes would get 10 and the objectivity comes in because there are 5 ways to lose a point or two so different girls could get 7 points for different reason.
I propose the classes should be......

1-  confidence / poise / posture; does she have excellent....?
2- body; is her chassis up to scratch in terms of my own personal preference?
3- face ; does the physical aspects of her face meet my preferences?
4- style. Would she look just as good in office gear, sweats; undies; casual; ball gown.....?
5- could I introduce her to my mother?

There is a korean girl who works in my building that would score as follows.
1- 2 points. Fantastic demeanor amd holds herself well.
2- 2 points  B cup pert breasts, shapely legs, taller than average, firm arse
3- 1 point. Stunningly lovely a great mix of beauty and sex appeal. Rarely smiles though so gets a sometimes
4- 2 points. Even when - saw her on the weekend once in scruff cloths she looked great. Always a class act
5- 1 point. I think she is grumpy so only on a good day.

- would have given her an 9.5 but seeing it on this scale I'd agree that she is infact an 8. Would love to fuck her though and cum on her classy face!

Now let's look at another example and I will use a celeb so you can all follow;

Pheobe out of friends.
1- 0 points. Hippy flower fairy. Enough said.
2- 1   tall, fairly tight, nice legs so a good chassis but sagging tits I guess
3- 1 pt. Somes times ok but not always. A bit beaky.
4 - 0 pt dresses like a tramp and not the good kind.
5- 1 pt - my mum would like her but not for my mrs.

So she is a three. On the old scale she would not be rated but she is doo-able so you see it is better!

Quick finish as ferry has arrived

hehe bro now that's a more scientific system.

For me it's a lot more simple

40% looks - Slim, Big Boobs, Pretty Face, Smooth Skin
60% Service - DFK, CIM, BBBJ, DATY, Screamer - PSE or GFE extra points.

This isn't about hookers or the scale used on here. This the girl you see on the street, on the MTR, a mate girlfriend, a colleague so you can't put service in the mix. So youneed to rely on the 40% of looks etc.....