The Nimitz Response Rating

Call me dumb, but I guess I’m a little cornfused. I appreciate all the work you put into this with fancy fonts and tabular columns, but based upon the far left column, you’re still using the tried and true 1-10 hotness scale (after you were critical of it) and then just applying different names. No?

Sydney Sweeney isn't really that hot. I seriously don't think I'd buy a dance. I'd argue I'd have to scroll for a while here instagram.com to find a girl who wasn't hotter than her.

I get that's not really your point, but it illiterates the fundamental problem that neither the MilliHelen nor the Nimitz Response solutions address. And that problem is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or put another way: its a matter of taste. I don't know how to fix that issue.

It does however at least partially address two other common issues, namely the dispute over where average lies. It does this by simply acknowledging that when dealing with strippers, average hotness is simply not worth noting. It also address the issue of the potential asymptotes at 0 and 10, again by simply avoiding the issue altogether and establishing upper and lower boundaries beyond which precise measurement isn't required.

Nice try, but I'll stick with the classic 0-10 scale for now. Even with its flaws.

@motorhead I guess, I'm saying the right-most column is a rough equivalent. Not an exact match.

Clearly the Nimitz Response Rating is much more nuanced, no?

What's the best wine? What's the best food? Where's the best vacation spot? All opinion. All subjective.

We’ve all read enough raviews here as an example, and I often think about…

There are guys that see a 10 everyday and there are guys that claim to never have seen a 10 because they don’t exist.

I like to think most of us fall somewhere in between.

For me, there comes a point where a woman is "hot enough" to trigger the gallant reflect that I don't care what number she might be, or what others might think of her. And it's only partially based on how she looks.

@ronjax2 some argue that there is a golden ratio of facial attractiveness based on facial symmetry.

It doesnt account for varied tastes in body type, but the thinking goes the more attractive faces are more symmetrical and closer to the golden ratio.

People who get work done on their face, usually are trying to move closer to that golden ratio.

And some people for different reasons dont store as much fat in the face or some have a bloated face even if they arent fat elsewhere. So it can sometimes lead to situations where someone is fat all over but attractive in the face, or skinny all over but fat in the face.

I think most of the debate on looks is about body type, racial preferences. An attractive face shouldnt be as debatable

@ronjax2 maybe my vision isnt so good but some girls i am convinced are super hot from far away, and once i see them up close i see they were just average

The reason there are so few 10s is because I think a girl deserves an extra point for sleeping with me, so 9 is the highest a girl can achieve until that happy event.

^ so does a 6 become a 7 if she sleeps with you? I strangely find that completely acceptable.

Good way to convince yourself you don't fuck ugly chicks.

It's not a far leap from +1 for fucking me to:

• Any chick who fucks me is a least a 7
• She fucked me
• She's a 7
• QED

I would gladly buy many dances from a blonde dancer with an all natural, tattoo free (?) big tit slamming body. Yeah her face is mid, but her body is my exact type that I have wasted plenty of cash on air dances chasing over the years.

You can see her good genes better without the jeans: thefappening.pro
Your carrier surface group will be sunk by the giant wave if one of PAWG_Patrol's favs falls backward into the ocean.

Regardless of the rating system, the inherent subjectivity makes ratings somewhat irrelevant. This is why a proper review should include descriptions of the dancers to let other PLs know what to expect so they can decide on their own depending on one’s own preference. Descriptions like spinner, GND, PAWG, BBW, skank, hag, supermodel, etc. are most helpful.

so does a 6 become a 7 if she sleeps with you? I strangely find that completely acceptable. Indeed she does. However, it is not advisable to tell her so beforehand.

@ronjax2 some argue that there is a golden ratio of facial attractiveness based on facial symmetry.

@chunkychicano

The golden ratio, "Phi" is 1.618...

DaVinci's Mona Lisa has a ton of golden ratios in it. The ratio of the length of her mouth compared to the width of her nose is Phi. Her face fits perfectly in a golden rectangle. And there are many more examples of Phi in the painting. If I'm remembering correctly, DaVinci was buddies with the mathematician Vitruvio who discovered the golden ratio.

The problem is, would you say the Mona Lisa is hot? I mean, I'd assert she's barely Patrol Boat hot. Her most compelling feature is the inscrutable facial expression.

I think you're right that symmetry is generally important in facial attractiveness. But then, think of the exceptions - Cindy Crawford's trademark mole comes to mind.

I've also read a 5:1 rule. The space between the eyes should be the length of one eye and the face should be 5 eyes wide. Also of course, high cheek bones.

There's another ratio, 0.71 that scientists have identified as being an ideal for a hip to waist ratio for women. But 0.71 is way off from Phi or it's inverse.

I guess my point is, attractiveness, particularly facial attractiveness is difficult to quantify mathematically.

Descriptions like spinner, GND, PAWG, BBW, skank, hag, supermodel, etc. are most helpful.

@iknowbetter I totally agree. Especially if I'm rating a dancer highly, I like to think of it like I'm going to stake a claim on some sort of rating system, and then justify why she warranted a high rating.