Post: #76

(11-24-2014 05:37 PM)la_mode Wrote:  Prefer 1-100 scale myself.

I'm sure you were just be facetious here, but now that I think about it, there is some merit in this.

Hear me out.

Wine is scored on a scale of 1-100. You rarely see anything below an 80, and certainly never below a 70. Why? Because wine worth drinking automatically brings it up to a 70. Anything less than that would be cooking wine or utter garbage.

You could make the exact same subjectivity argument about wine tasting. After all, everyone's sense of taste is different, right? And yet, there is a very clear cut criterion from which to judge wine. Is it a proper expression of the grape variety? Did the weather from that particular year yield an excess of sugar? Or a lack of sugar? How is the aroma? The taste? Does it linger on the palate or does it vanish? How's the color? How's the body (viscosity)?

For each wine, there are known characteristics that are sought after. There are qualities in a Sangiovese that you expect from that particular grape; you would never expect qualities from Merlot to match those from Sangiovese. And so it goes in the broad variety of grapes and winemaking styles.

With this in mind, there are distinct differences between a 92 point wine and a 96 point wine. The more I think about it, the more I can see this in women as well.

I can take some of the posts in this thread and integrate them into this system quite easily. But in order to do so, we have to establish some degree of expertise in analyzing women; this system is not for every man to volley about. We'd have to establish rules. The key factors, I believe, are age, and race. Hear me out.

Unlike wine, women do not get better with age. A 34 year old 8 is not equal to a 22 year old 8.

And as far as race goes, men who don't have any taste for asians should not be included in discussing them. It would make no sense for a wine drinker to judge California wines if he hated New World wines.

So, just as in wine, where wines are judged in how good of an expression that particular wine is of the grape, so too should women be judged on how good of an expression she is of that racial group. It makes no sense to compare Vietnamese women to Ukranian women.

So before moving forward in this discussion, we'd have to establish: What are the ideal expressions of each racial group?

This system is infinitely more complex and complicated, but I see it as being the most accurate.

So instead of having that classical pictograph of the 1-10 scale as it applies to white women, we'd need one that applies to other racial groups as well. Maybe 1 pacific islander, 1 latina, 1 Western/North European, 1 Eastern European, 1 light skinned black, 1 dark skinned black, 1 Central Asian (Kazakh), 1 Southern Asian (Indian/Bengali) 1 Southeast Asian, 1 Eastern Asian.

Now on TOP of all that, we'd have to discuss the second integer. Let's say you have a 2 integer system where the first number represents the overall impression of a chick...so instead of calling her a 5 or a 6, she's be a 5x or 6x, where the second integer represents "bonus points", like runsonmagic's cosplay fetish, or maybe she gives the best head, or maybe she's a great cook, gives thoughtful gifts, cleans your apartment, rubs your back, etc.

I'd break it down like:
Great blowjob skills +2
Low previous partner count +1
23 years old or under +1
Great cook +1
Cleans your place +1
Frequently horny +1
Free of tattoos, piercings, and short hair +1
Tastefully applied makeup, good general sense of style +1
...and so on

Cute 23 year old girl with obvious facial flaws and 15 lbs overweight but she keeps you fed, doesn't nag, 2 previous sexual partners, and keeps your balls drained? Lets give her a 68.

28 year old actress with a great face, killer body, glued to her iphone, has 15 orbiters, can't cook worth shit, and consistently flakes? she's an 80.

I know this is too complicated for most but I swear I'm onto something here.

Post: #77

Regardless of all this chatter we're still on the internet so my 1-4 scale stands tall.

Post: #78

I stopped using the 1-10 scale long ago. The guys I know who were the most harsh in their numerical judgments were guys that were in relationships with plain-looking girls themselves, or guys who were really religious and weren't in the game themselves, just observing.

[ Just deleted my scale that I presented because I read El Mech's which is much simpler and gets to the point I was trying to make anyway. Shout out to El Mechanico. ]

Also keep in mind there is a race /exotic factor. People are judge other races differently than guys of that race because you are usually turned on by the exotic factor and more picky about your own race.

Post: #79

A 2, a 5, a 7, and a 9.. everyone should be within a few points of each other, or you're living on a different planet.

Post: #80

If there's one thing we can agree on, even for those who continue to use the 1-10 scale, is to NOT put HB in front of it (i.e. HB7).

When I found out "HB" stood for "Hot Babe" apparently from the early PUA days, I was like:



First of all, using the term "Hot Babe" to describe tons of girls is pedestalizing to begin with, and doesn't help build a red pill mentality.

Secondly, if you're putting that in front of a number like HB6, how is she supposed to be that hot if she's just a 6 or 7?

I still see multiple guys doing this in the forum and I sometimes wonder if their next post is gonna be about 6 inch platform boots or their new routine called "The Sphere".

Post: #81

Big-ballerism is when i see Veloce, a high-repped member, claiming that he banged a 8,5-9.5 last week, but states that lucy lui is a 6.5 at best. Tuth is right, the 1-10 scale must go

Post: #82

I say keep the 1-10 scale, as broken as it is. At a minimum, it will lead to some interesting conversations.

Post: #83

(11-24-2014 11:36 PM)seabridge Wrote:  Big-ballerism is when i see Veloce, a high-repped member, claiming that he banged a 8,5-9.5 last week, but states that lucy lui is a 6.5 at best. Tuth is right, the 1-10 scale must go

Lucy Liu is not really that hot for a Chinese celebrity. Even in her prime. When they polled Mainland Chinese men and women about her, they thought she looked average. If you ask Chinese in America, most of them think so as well. That said, she is not a 6.5 at best. She still prettier than a 6. Her body, hair, teeth, etc. alone would set her at 7 minimum and it's not like she is a complete butterface.

Also there is a reason Veloce is that highly repped. He knows what the fuck he is talking about. You won't agree with everything he says, but he is spot on 98%+ of the time. I have no reason to doubt he knocks down ass hotter than Lucy Liu. If that is possible for me, I have no reason to doubt a guy like him can do that as well. Shit, Huwzhere's girls are way hotter than Lucy Liu and he has no where near that much rep here on RVF and he is a young college kid. I would rank that one gf I saw a 10. Some might say she is a 9, but I don't think women get much hotter than that. I think she was Russian too if I recall correctly. That bitch was bad.

I know guys here are always skittish for Little Dark, Dash Global types, etc. but give credit where credit is due. The vast majority of us are not schlubs or losers. Most of us are apex predators, hence the "alpha" connotation.

Post: #84

(11-25-2014 02:41 AM)Bacchus Wrote:  I say keep the 1-10 scale, as broken as it is. At a minimum, it will lead to some interesting conversations.

I agree, and besides:

1. When I compare my rating to my friends' ratings, or ratings I've seen dealt on this forum, it's never more than 1 point off;

2. Considering above statement, the 1-10 rating at the very least gives you an idea of what we're working with.

As a result I definitely wouldn't support a complete dismissal of this system.

Post: #85

My biggest annoyance is with the guys who refer to an ugly girl as a 5 or even a 6. Surely a 5 is supposed to be "average". If someone gets drunk and lowers their standards, it is invariably claimed to be a 6 when in reality she was probably a 3 or 4.

Post: #86

(11-25-2014 09:13 AM)dreambig Wrote:  My biggest annoyance is with the guys who refer to an ugly girl as a 5 or even a 6. Surely a 5 is supposed to be "average". If someone gets drunk and lowers their standards, it is invariably claimed to be a 6 when in reality she was probably a 3 or 4.

That's a good point there.

Does 5 equal mediocre? Average based upon their local competition? Or does it just mean not ugly? Or could all of those be possible, like not mutually exclusive.

What a guy thinks 5 actually means, kinda affects everything else past 5. Almost everyone thinks the same about 1-4's.

Post: #87

I'm surprised no one here has factored in the attractiveness of the male himself and how that might impact how he rates women

I'll just go ahead and show myself out...

Post: #88

(11-25-2014 11:19 AM)L M McCoy Wrote:  I'm surprised no one here has factored in the attractiveness of the male himself and how that might impact how he rates women

I'll just go ahead and show myself out...

If I had a doghouse to throw a player into, it would be you. I am still saddened you find those latest butchered scags in the WYB thread attractive. I thought you were my boy! I was so stunned I did not know what to say. So yeah take your coat brah on your way out the thread. You like nasty bitches.

This is why I say boner test doesn't work. Some guys would get hard even if a Fiend/Raider from the Fallout Series looking girl brushed their ass up against them. No man should ever trust their dick 100%.

That said, McCoy does have a point though. Self esteem, feelings of inadequacy, etc. in some guys can affect their ratings on others.

Post: #89

I go by the binary boner scale. She is either 1 or 0.

To bang or not to bang, that is the only question.

Post: #90

(11-24-2014 03:44 PM)frenchie Wrote:  I've mentioned this in another thread.

The beauty scale should be devoid of taste. Where I may have a ginger and asian fetish, another guy may like black girls.

The scale should only be between 1 and 8. The accuracy and precision increases. From of the "what does a 10" look like threads, some women are easily 7s in my book. Nothing too special about them in my opinion.

In fact, i've never really given a girl a 9 or 10 in my book. Only 8s. I don't think i've ever really met a true 9 or 10 before.

I think 9's are rare and a 10? I think that's a dream girl, the hint being in the word 'dream'. Pretty girls are generally 7's. There's no shame in banging 7's.

I can say going by my scale that I've not fucked a 9 and neither have any of my gaming pals. We've all done 8's and generally hit 7's and above. We rarely go for 6's as there's no 'DNA tug'.

Post: #91

Say Tuth, since this is like a meeting at our RVF office, who is going to get on the whiteboard with a dry erase marker and make brainstorming columns for the issues, challenges, a roadmap, goals, takeaway items, etc.

Post: #92

(11-25-2014 11:32 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

(11-24-2014 03:44 PM)frenchie Wrote:  I've mentioned this in another thread.

The beauty scale should be devoid of taste. Where I may have a ginger and asian fetish, another guy may like black girls.

The scale should only be between 1 and 8. The accuracy and precision increases. From of the "what does a 10" look like threads, some women are easily 7s in my book. Nothing too special about them in my opinion.

In fact, i've never really given a girl a 9 or 10 in my book. Only 8s. I don't think i've ever really met a true 9 or 10 before.

I think 9's are rare and a 10? I think that's a dream girl, the hint being in the word 'dream'. Pretty girls are generally 7's. There's no shame in banging 7's.

I can say going by my scale that I've not fucked a 9 and neither have any of my gaming pals. We've all done 8's and generally hit 7's and above. We rarely go for 6's as there's no 'DNA tug'.

I take it back, there was one girl I banged that was a 9. I was 18 at the time and she was 15 (legal in my state). We met at a party and did the deed later that night. She had the tightest body ever.

No girl has come close to how awesome she was.

(11-25-2014 11:36 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  Say Tuth, since this is like a meeting at our RVF office, who is going to get on the whiteboard with a dry erase marker and make brainstorming columns for the issues, challenges, a roadmap, goals, takeaway items, etc.

Tuth during the meeting

Post: #93

(11-24-2014 11:36 PM)seabridge Wrote:  Big-ballerism is when i see Veloce, a high-repped member, claiming that he banged a 8,5-9.5 last week, but states that lucy lui is a 6.5 at best. Tuth is right, the 1-10 scale must go

Nah, bullshit. I normally wouldn't bother respond to such an accusation coming from a low-count, unrepped member, but for the sake of the forum discussion I'll indulge this.

What makes it so implausible that a forum member could bang a girl that's better looking than one of the many overhyped Hollywood media darlings that we're constantly told is some standard bearer for female aesthetics? You need to unplug. Not only have I banged girls that I consider hotter than Lucy Liu, I've seen other forum members with girls that are hotter. I see girls on a weekly basis that I think are hotter. I can walk around the UCLA campus and see dozens of girls I'd consider hotter. It's not that I'm consistently banging 8+ girls (I've never made such a claim), it's that aging Hollywood starlets do nothing for me.

If you think this is any higher than a 7 then I'm not sure what else to say:


I'm willing to stretch up to a 7 for her, and if you think she's any higher than you must also think that Gwyneth Paltrow is hot.

They're both nothing more than bangable milfs.

The classic 8 in my mind is an import model:


Not only are her features more classic and less weird than lucy liu, she's also probably 10 (edit, more like 20) years younger. And yet, if you were see this girl naked and without makeup, you would find flaws.

My numbers stand.

Post: #94

(11-25-2014 09:13 AM)dreambig Wrote:  My biggest annoyance is with the guys who refer to an ugly girl as a 5 or even a 6. Surely a 5 is supposed to be "average". If someone gets drunk and lowers their standards, it is invariably claimed to be a 6 when in reality she was probably a 3 or 4.

Well, when you use the word "average" then we must take region into account.

Average American girls means one thing, while average French girls means another.

Average girl in L.A. means one thing, average girl in Zanesville means another.

If we can assume that you would NOT want to bang the average girl in the U.S., yes I would agree that amounts to a 5. If it takes you a few drinks to consider sex with her, that's a 5. If your friends saw her, they would give you some shit about it, but they'd understand.

The jump from 5 to 6 is going from a girl you WOULD bang (with alcohol or in a major dry spell) to a girl you WANT to bang.

How many girls do you see walking around that you want to bang? Depends on geography. L.A. is particularly hard, because I swear there are severe fluctuations here. I call it "Girl Weather". There are some days I'm out in the city and all I see are sweatpants wearing chunksters walking around with starbucks cups. Other days I swear there must be a series of high profile auditions going on in the city because there are 8s galore walking around. This place is so diverse, there really is no "average" L.A. girl. I imagine this is not the case in other cities but who knows.

Post: #95

I have no idea how guys manage to 'number scale' girls. They must have some kind of attraction dial in their head that I don't have.
And then you get the guys who use decimal points
And then you get the guys who use an adjective on top of that!

You have to be kidding.

"She was a solid 8.5". What is this? Is this a metallurgical term? 'A solid 8.5 pounds of copper' or something? Perhaps there is a 'gooey 8.5', which is a step down, but not quite an 8.4 .

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if you're using a decimal point at any point in a description of a woman's attractiveness, there is a good chance that you're an idiot.

At best I can weigh up two or three specific girls against each other, and choose a favourite. But even that is hard. What if one girl has a nicer bum but the other girl has a cuter face? What if one girls voice is more melodic, but her teeth are worse? How can you possibly turn all this into a number?

1. Boner test
2. Would most prefer to bone again test

Post: #96

The 1 - 10 scale can simply be condensed to No, Yes, and Hell Yes (credit: Vicious). From that point, the degree of attractiveness of a woman within the "Yes" and "Hell Yes" categories can be further fleshed out using 7 - 10. Bickering about what constitutes a 1 - 6 is pointless.

Post: #97

Tuthmosis Wrote:I think it might be time to let go of the 1-to-10. What do you guys think?

I think all of your points are valid. But most the problems you describe go deeper than the language used to express them. The scale itself is just language. So I don't agree with the conclusion.

Extrapolation, big-ballerism, and mental masturbation are all problems whether you are using the 10 point scale or not. Man #1 sees an amazing ass, Man #2 sees cottage cheese thighs. Man #1 says "Boner-inducing" mand #2 says "Fatty." Same problem. They could have said "7.5" and "4." Man #3 posts a picture of a proud bang and a big-baller #4 calls her too ugly to even deserve eye contact. No point scale needed.

10 point scale is still useful in a sincere discussion between guys about female attractiveness, which is often crucial context in such discussions. It almost always matters how hot she is. Much easier to say "she was a 9" and get on with the story than dwell on the particulars of the girl's beauty. Much easier to say "she is a 7" than to tediously try and precisely describe her attractiveness, especially if doing so might render that person identifiable.

Taken with the appropriate grain of salt and abandoned at the first sign of mental masturbation arguments over what means what, I think the 10-point scale is worthwhile. Certainly, it can be a crutch in place of more expressive language, but sometimes shortcuts like that are useful in casual, informal discussion.

Post: #98

(11-25-2014 12:09 PM)Phoenix Wrote:  I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if you're using a decimal point at any point in a description of a woman's attractiveness, there is a good chance that you're an idiot.

I would use the word "connoisseur".

You guys using the binary...is that how you look at food? "Would eat it". "Would not eat it".

What a sad world, when you can't properly express the difference between a $.99 Taco Bell Gordita and a butter-poached lobster tail.

Post: #99

(11-25-2014 12:16 PM)Veloce Wrote:  What a sad world, when you can't properly express the difference between a $.99 Taco Bell Gordita and a butter-poached lobster tail.

My sentiments exactly. I would never take recommendations on restaurants, accommodations, electronics, movies, or just about anything else from someone who subscribes to the binary system. If these guys had invented Yelp, all the ratings would be 1 star.

Tuthmosis: How was that movie?
Binary Dude: It was watchable.

Tuthmosis: How was that hotel?
Binary Dude: It was stay-able.

Tuthmosis: How's that new smartphone?
Binary Dude: It's usable.

Nuance is one of the great inventions of modern discourse and the marker of higher-order analytic skills.

Post: #100

Quote:Cute 23 year old girl with obvious facial flaws and 15 lbs overweight but she keeps you fed, doesn't nag, 2 previous sexual partners, and keeps your balls drained? Lets give her a 68.

If the girl should be 100 lbs that is 15 l% overweight. 20% =obese..no thanks!