Nepals. Another failure of the ranking system.

Danged arithmetic, it's always adding decimal points. :)

"The only problem with rankings is people expecting them to mean anything. Everywhere you look nowadays - newspapers, TV, websites - you see statisical reports in the form of Top 10 or Top 100 lists simply because computers can spit them out easily. At best, they can make for diverting junk reading."

I agree 99.873%. The thing I find especially ludicrous is providing averages to 3 significnat digits when the original data hasa only one significant digit. But then wasn't baseball doing that long before computers came along and screwed up our lives?

Book Guy: It's only a problem if you think they mean something. I don't buy the "trend analysis" function they're supposed to fulfill. It's just a gimmick, so I don't care which is which.

I think the "only" problem with the ranking and rating system is, NOBODY CAN REMEMBER THE DIFFERENCE.

I have to look it up on the FAQ every single time I am checking a set of clubs' overall ranks ... erm, I mean, ratings ... erm, I mean, umm, levels of relative quality. One of them is more recent, one of them is longer term.

Why not call them, "Shorter-term ranking" and "Longer-term ranking" instead? Or "Rating: recently" and "Rating: overall"? Anything to alleviate the confusion.

In Founder's defense, the answer to the question, "Which is which?" is readily found right there on the FAQ. Umm. I think ...

Nepals is a decent club for where it is. Not top ten material, but it belongs in the top 100.

>It's been awhile for me but it's a 7 or 8 at best.<

That's how I scored it, and within a half point of how it has averaged with others. Whoop De Fucking Doo! Some controversy we have here.

>I think the problem with both ratings and rankings is that we're often comparing apples to oranges.<

If so, then the solution is easy: Stop comparing. The only problem with rankings is people expecting them to mean anything. Everywhere you look nowadays - newspapers, TV, websites - you see statisical reports in the form of Top 10 or Top 100 lists simply because computers can spit them out easily. At best, they can make for diverting junk reading.

TUSCL displays club rankings as a numbered list because it can. Period. Who cares whether one set of reviewers in South Carolina rate a club a fraction of a point higher than a different set of reviewers in Texas or Ontario rate their clubs? You know the people working there couldn't give a shit.

I don't know. I think it's fun to look at hot girls and interact with them even if you're not feeling them all up. Of course getting your hands on the hot girls would be more fun to me.

I trust pop and his reviews. We share the same favorite club...

It's been awhile for me but it's a 7 or 8 at best. It's plenty comfortable, just a little short on fun.

I think the problem with both ratings and rankings is that we're often comparing apples to oranges. How can you possibly compare a small neighborhood place to a large glitzy gentlemen's club? Or a club who's primary focus is to provide a pleasant place where customers can sit and talk while enjoying a drink and watching girls dance vs. one who's primary purpose is to provide high-contact LDs and maybe extras? Your rating will always reflect which type of place you prefer regardless of how good or bad a job it does in meeting it's pbjective.

Casualguy, has it always been topless? I frankly don't much care but I could have sworn it was fully nude, but it's been several years sinse I was there last.

Chandler, what I described took place in one of their VIP rooms maybe 7-8 years ago, where a bouncer peeked in once in awhile, which was just about the only thing I didn't like about Nepals. It was my first visit and I didn't know the rules, which sometimes can be a good thing. It was one of those times where I asked the girl what the rules were and she said she didn't care what I did as long as no one was watching, at least I think that's what she said. She had a very strong accent so it was hard to understand her, which may have helped. I usually try to obey the rules but when you don't know what they are it can add to the fun.

Just a correction. Nepals is topless, not nude. I thought the no touching was pretty strictly enforced. However I'm a regular and haven't been trying to push the boundaries or get thrown out.

I think some of you take the club rankings far more seriously than should be expected. It's not a contest, people. What difference does it make whether a club is #2 or #42? They're both highly recommended. That's about all you should try to conclude from just the numbers on a national site where everybody has different priorities. I still haven't seen any ideas that would address the so-called failure of the system.

A glance at the Top 10 shows that the #1 club is topless and the #3 club is non alcohol. I'm sure there are many people who think there's no way those should be in the Top 10. I happen to think the #9 club doesn't belong because of their fuglies, but so be it.

I don't believe anybody can judge a club very well without going there. Based on reviews I had read, I was doubting that I would enjoy the dances at Nepals, but they were very good. The contact before and after the dances wasn't bad, either. I'm glad I went, and so are some other people.

Chitown: Agreed. I DO read those reviews though, for explicit details, and I have to admit that if I find myself in San Diego on business, I'm going to pay that place a visit.

In my opinion, and to re-visit a pet peeve of mine, I think the failure of the rating system is represented by the inclusion of Mexican whorehouses. I understand that sometimes the distinction between a high extras strip club and a bordello can be fuzzy...but it is my understanding that the Mexican places are unabashed whorehouses. To group them with places that at least have the burden of providing some semblance of "dancing" is unfair and not useful.

The few times I've been there I liked Nepals, I think it's one of the nicest places I've ever visited. It has almost everything I like in a club - a very friendly atmosphere, attractive women dancing nude, a comfortable seating arrangement that allows you to sit and talk and the girls are more than willing to do so, music that isn't too loud, it's moderately priced, and it has a clean and relaxing atmosphere. It's upscale enough so that there aren't any loud obnoxious customers or young punks, but it's not stuffy and doesn't feel like a cip joint. And there aren't any annoyingly aggressive dancers - no one ever asks "wanna dance" without sitting and talking for awhile first. It reminds me of the old Playboy clubs, which I always liked. If I lived within an hour of Nepals I'd be a regular. But it isn't high contact, so if that's your #1 priority, you won't like the place. I probably rated it an 8 or 9, and if it hasn't changed I would do so again.

If a club doesn't consistently offer dancers that will provide good two-way contact, there is NO way that it should be in top ten... and definitely not a #2 club.

I did suggest to one dancer here that if they had an all nude hour where they had to stop serving beer and alcohol to satisfy SC law, I would go for that. She only said that then she wouldn't be working there. bummer.

I would really like more nude clubs with several good looking dancers.

I should say that visitors face a good chance of getting disappointed. Many people here are regulars and the dancers tend to visit with their regulars and talk and talk without feeling too much of a need to circulate all the time and ask "wanna dance" like other higher hassle clubs. The dancers do circulate but not usually too fast. One dancer who is now working at the Masters remembers me from here. I'm not trying to discourage visitors because I don't want the club getting crowded (well maybe just a little) but I'm just telling it like it is.

Nepals is the only club where two dancers suddenly came over to me and gave me a double dance for free. They claimed I had a hidden benefactor but I never found out who. I've encountered a number of classy dancers here who only moonlight at this club and have real non stripping jobs. It can be nice talking to them which is easy enough to do if they happen to sit at your table. I call this club a great club for the locals.

I kind of doubt it's one of the best clubs in the nation. I do think it's one of the top 3 clubs of the upstate of south carolina. I have been routinely visiting even though I don't always post reviews. If Platinum Plus clubs had the same atmosphere (music not too loud, not too smoky, nice classy club) and the great lap dances PP offers, I would rate PP a 10 every time. I think the high rating has more to do with other posters being highly critical and giving low ratings of other clubs. There is something nice about going to a strip club and seeing pretty girls and actually being able to relax in a small local club without the music blasting so loud. I'd give it an 8. It all depends on what you want in a strip club too. If you want two way contact lap dances, you're going to be disappointed at Nepals.

I don't really think the rating system is that bad. It's more like the people visiting haven't had a really bad experience yet and must be getting what they expected. There are some hot looking girls working there as well. At least one comes to mind to me right now. I think I've seen several hot looking girls in the summertime at the beach clubs though. Nepals isn't the 2nd best club in the nation but it's nice to know I'm so powerful in the rating system. lol, :) just joking.

I had a great time at Nepals the one time I went. I know FONDL likes it a lot, too. What's your problem with it? And why is its high rating a failure of the system and not just other people having a different opinion about a club?

So are we going by ranking or rating? Because it rates as 35 and ranks as 3. Not that that really matters a whole lot. People go where they are comfortable at.

I believe it has always been topless. Of course I only know the history of this club for the last 7 to 10 years so I don't know what the club was like when it first opened or even when it opened. There used to be a nearby nude club at one time but it closed down. Don't remember why. I wouldn't be surprised if the city had something to do with that.

Touching was virtually forbidden during table dances when I was there nearly two years ago. However, the girls more than made up for it.

I agree with Chandler that the dances can be quite good at Nepals. You aren't supposed to use your hands, but not all the girls enforce that rule. Once I was with a very attractive little Russian girl who positioned her body so that the bouncer couldn't see what we were doing, then she encouraged me to do as much touching as I wished. The contact was about as good as I've ever had in a legal establishment. So like most clubs, YMMV depending on the girl.

Now #2 in the rankings. A club that only has 1 way contact. I thought that TUSCL was here to promote high mileage. I don't want to go to a strip club to relax and have a few beers. I can do that at home and for a lot less money. I would prefer that TUSCL revert back to showing the top 10 rated clubs on their home page.

Well, I didn't think TUSCL was here in order to promote high mileage, but I do wish that a non-contact club weren't so easily rated / ranked as high as that place seems to be. There's just something annoying about a bunch of inexperienced adolescents getting all excited about some club because "she was SHAVED man!" and giving it hundreds of 10s for no other reason than the fact that they haven't been to any other decent clubs ever.

If it bothers you so much, bookmark the Discussion Board page, then you'll never have to see the Top 10 again.

BTW, Book Guy, what club are you talking about?

Chandler: just the putative hypothetical one. I've read, at any given odd time, an "outlier" review or two of some mainstream club. By "fair" estimates, I'd say a given club that "deserved" a 7 rating, when compared to most national standards of club quality. But because the Homer Hick dudes had never been to any other club, they rate it a 10 or 9 on the basis of things that really shouldn't be all that noteworthy -- the DJ playing "his song" for the hottest girl; the feature girl showing her pussy; all the girls having shaved pussies; the tits on one or another girl being "perfect"; etc.

Those criteria should just be ... standard fare. They don't merit rating the club a 10 on the basis of them alone. But dudes who haven't been around, get all excited.

Well I just want to thank all you guys for getting so upset a little club beat your favorite. It only takes 8 people to give a good rating to make a club number one on TUSCL. It's kind of like looking at stocks, the rating isn't necessarily all you can go by to tell whether it's a good deal or not. I could go visit Platinum Plus in Columbia if I wanted to drive an extra 30 minutes longer than I already do. Instead I visit clubs in the upstate and Nepals is often one of them.

I noticed my latest review for Nepals must have been averaged out. I think that's why the rating for Nepals jumped back up with no review unless some older reviews got deleted. I was wondering about that.

Book Guy: I've seen overexcited newbie reviews here and there, too. That's not the case with Nepals. It's just a club that rarely gets a low rating because they've done a good job of eliminating so much of what's annoying at other clubs. You might find that they've eliminated too much contact along with it. It doesn't seem to bother those who have reviewed it, because they have different priorities, not because they're naive.

chandler: You and bookguy are not the only posters on here. If you don't like my posts, you know where the ignore button is.

And btw, I talked with Alcia on Tuesday. She denies ever having told you that she was a lesbian. She is in fact married with a 7 yo daughter. Witch I already knew.

I'm not familiar with Nepals, yet I don't consider this to be a failure of the ranking system, but merely a manifestation of the inherent flaws in an imperfect system. One being that an "8" in 1 town isn't the same as an "8" in another town. That said, (and I'll say this again), is that I've found a positive correlation between relative rankings between clubs in same area. Eg- I've enjoyed a 7.55 club more than a 5.55 club. Still, I read between the lines, I just might prefer a nasty nude club just outside city limits over a high end topless club downtown rated just slightly higher.

minnow: I agree. When ever I post a review for an ATL ( home of the air dance) club, I always include that in my review.

IGU: Did I say something out of bounds about your posts? I don't see why you're bringing up the ignore button.

As for Alicia, this is about the third time you've told me this, and each time I've replied that you must have me confused with somebody else. All I ever said about Alicia is how much I liked her dances. I never said she was a lesbian, or whether she was married. I don't remember whether she told me one way or another.

Well I guess some of the guys may be right. I mean why should a club deserve a spot on the top 10 club list if you can't grab her tits or finger fuck her? Obviously a failure of this web site to direct customers to the best action if that's what you think the list is for.

"... Nepals. It's just a club that rarely gets a low rating because they've done a good job of eliminating so much of what's annoying at other clubs." That's exactly why I rate Nepals highly. And it's pretty rare. Why can't other clubs do the same?

Nepals should get no higher than a 7. It is nowhere near the top 10 in the country.

I remember a few occasions when I felt the same way about Platinum Plus in Columbia that it deserved no rating higher than a 7. Music so loud it hurt your ears before you hardly even got in the building let alone within 30 ft of any speaker, sofas in the back falling apart and rock back and forth if you got a not so good one. Others just a step above a bench. So dark you can't even see the money in your wallet. Dancers that didn't appeal to me and seemed to average from a 5 to 6. However I may have had one or two good dances and forgave the club for all their bad things and gave them an 8 or 9 on the rating.

I like Nepals as a decent local club but I never claimed it was one of the best in the nation. I've rated it this past year from 6 to 8 which averages to 7. Just love this controversy. I usually rate Platinum Plus clubs higher in case no one noticed.

casualguy: the first time I visited CAE PP. I wouldn't have rated it higher than a 7 either. But I met the beautifull and charming "Carter" and I was hooked. She made the club. I have never ever met a dancer like her. This was 6 years ago and the club was not even rated in the top 40. Shekitout, pop and myself continued to give the club good ratings and soon the club was in the top 40. Then Carter quit the business. Many said the club would fail without her. The club message board wound up 2nd for the most posts that year. A tribute to Carter. Carter was also shekitouts ATF and probabbly 100 more. We found new toys to play with and continued to give the club good ratings. The club rose and rose to where it is today. She made it, we promoted it. Yeah the music is too fucking loud and the DJ's are obnoxious. That ain't gonna change (wear your ear muffs). Neither is high mileage lap dances at resonable prices. I have lost 2 high ranking dancers on my favorites list in the last 3 months but I am finding replacements...

I remember one dancer from Nepals worked for a few weeks in a nude club in the upstate and I decided to visit PP in Columbia for a break from routine one weekend. The second I walked in the club, I saw the same dancer as soon as I entered dancing on the little cage satellite stage. She spoke first and said "what are you doing here?" I seem to run into some of the same dancers at different clubs. Another former dancer of Nepals is currently working at the Masters in Myrtle Beach. There's a list of hot dancers that used to work at Nepals but they come and go just like other strip clubs. I've seen dancers from other clubs temporarily working in Nepals. Just last weekend I saw a former PP dancer from Columbia working in the Greenville club. Can't remember names very well though.

I first visited PP in Columbia about 10 years ago and was a regular there for a while. It got crowded on the weekends just like it does now. There was also a nude club in Columbia I liked to visit but I stopped visiting and less than a year later after that they closed. The nude club got crowded as well. Not sure why they closed but something happened to tick me off and make me stop visiting. Probably stopped visiting Columbia clubs at the same time.