Comments by jacej (page 8)

Table and bar seat dances are $10. Couch dances in the communal dance area are $25. Saw a guy doing a "wall" dance where he was rubbing up against a girl on the wall of the communal dance area, but outside the dance area. That would be $10 dance too.

Papi Chulo https://tuscl.net/member.php?id=278740 and Twentyfive https://tuscl.net/member.php?id=216566 are experts in the Miami area. Feel free to PM them.

Many thanks. I like looking at things in full mode - saves on clicking back and forth.

@mets - not only will there be a quiz, but also a final on which 75% you grade will be based. Papi automatically gets an A for having PM'd with some salient observations about CHG!

Yew got it, brutha! In my line of work, wordy is the norm, so I can't seem to shake it! At least it's good for developing skills to chat up a girl. I can talk about almost nothing for hours - though that can backfire with civvies. With strippers, they'll listen to you talk about nothing for as long as you want as long as the money keeps flowing.

I second ATACdawg's sentiment. Given the wife's disposition of being the moderately jealous type, no good can come of this. There's a reason why you hid your hobby from her until recently. Taking the wife to a strip club isn't a good way to show that you're penitent in any way, especially if you get a hot chick grinding on you and it's obvious that you're into the dance and enjoying it. You're sex life may be great, but it could abruptly turn frigid very quickly as a result of the outing. If you do decide to go, maybe just stick to tipping and don't get a lap dance. I can't tell you how many times I've been to a club where a couple's there, and it's clear that the dude is enjoying himself, and the GF/wife totally does not want to be there. Don't be that couple. While hindsight is 20/20, you should have kept your hobby in the closet from her. Good luck. Post an update on the aftermath. Maybe the doomsayers among us will be proven wrong.

Oh yeah....mapping of the club locations is dope! Thank you!

Ditto - hardwood only. Hardwood is good for hard wood.

1. Never, ever, ever fall in love with a stripper. 2. Always pay in cash/never use a credit or ATM card (what Warrior said). 3. Be respectful to the dancers/don't be an asshole. You'll get more mileage that way.

Geez...I keep adding on. Also, taking into account the number of reviews, and unique reviewers, photos, VIP, etc. those numbers could also be added in to the composite score. However, they would have to be "normalized" to a 10 point scale (which is what is currently being used). This thread might be helpful: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/942738/algorithm-to-calculate-rating-based-on-multiple-reviews-using-both-review-score

Right now, I'm seeing three different rating values being displayed for clubs: Club, Dancers, and Dollar Value. Maybe some sort of hybrid rating system could be used, where the overall individual ratings for each component is calculated using a linearly weighted moving average methodology, and then a single overall score could be calculated using all those components, but weighing the components in some fashion, which would be completely arbitrary and a judgment call on what you feel is most important. Again, this is similar to schmoe's suggestion. So to come up with a composite score, I think that the Club and Dancer components are the most important, with dollar value being last as dollar value can be all over the place depending on who you are, what you're looking for, and how good your game is. You could give the Club and Dancer components weights of, say 3, and the dollar value a weight of 1. If the linearly weighted moving average for the components are, for example, Club 8.8, Dancers 7.2, and Dollar Value 4.3, the composite score would be a weighted average calculated like this: (8.8*3)+(7.2*3)+(4.3*1)/(3+3+1) = 7.47. Obviously, this could be fiddled with a lot depending on what you (or the consensus) believes is more important.

Also, since the number of ratings would remain constant, e.g., 30, and wouldn't increase as the number of ratings are submitted (so the 31st and older ratings would be ignored, regardless if there are 40, 80, 100 or more reviews), I believe that the methodology I've described above is technically a linearly weighted moving average as the weighted average "moves" along with the data as it comes in.

This is similar to schmoe's suggestion. How about a linearly average weighted calculation that weighs recent scores more heavily, and gives less weight to older scores as the more recent scores would be more reflective of the current state of the club. There are some articles on the Internet on how to do this, but the basic idea is that you would take the say...the most recent 10 ratings. The most recent one would be given a weight of 10, the second most recent would be given a weight of 9, etc., and the last rating would be given a weight of 1. You add all those ratings up, and divide by the number of weights. By way of example, here's how it would work using just 4 ratings to keep the math easy. Say the ratings were 6, 4, 9, and 3 for the last four ratings, from newest to oldest. The linearly weighted average calculation would then be as follows: For the numerator: (6*4)+(4*3)+(9*2)+(3*1)=57. For the denominator, you add up the number of weights: 4+3+2+1=10. The resulting linearly weighted average for that club would be 57/10=5.7 By just taking a certain number of recent ratings (it could be 10, 20, 30, whatever) and weighing the most recent ratings more heavily, that prevents the club from being penalized for crappy bad experiences in the past, or being unfairly rewarded for past performance that isn't reflective of current conditions. As for how to score, I actually liked how each scoring component was broken out regarding club rating, value, girls, etc. That gave me a rough idea on what to expect, though it wasn't clear to me how the ratings were calculated, i.e., was it a total average of all scores from the beginning of time? Or something else?

We should get founder to add that to the glossary!

When I look at reviews for a particular club, I think the "sort by most recent review" function doesn't work correctly all the time. When I do that, I'll still see some very recent reviews that come after older reviews. Bug, maybe?

One thing I forgot to add about pricing - there might be $35 rooms now. When going to the $25 dance area, I saw a sign pointing to the champagne rooms that said "$35 dances." I asked a girl what that was about, and she said that the dances were in larger rooms. I didn't have a chance to go back there to see what the changes were about, but that's something to follow up on for the next visit.

Ha! Almost - my best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend is related to this guy who knows this kid who's going with this girl who saw Tom Clancy pass out at 31 Flavors last night.

Wait until my next review of Scarlett's - it's a Papi-sized novella! Holding onto it until Dec. 13 so I can get VIP credit for it.

Yeah. I tried that move, but she was freakin' stalking me. 😣

Yes. Too wordy.

1 million dollars!

@hg - thanks for the follow up.

This wasn't me (honest!), but a buddy of mine would get busted by his SO because of what he wore. The stripper scent (perfume, lotion, whatever) lingers on clothes and body parts for a looong time, and if he didn't change before he went home, he would get busted. Also, random strands of hair that are not the hair color of his SO would also out him. Now, he's does what Subra does and always has a change of clothes. Also, he only clubs on business trips or when he's out of town (or if his SO is out of town), and never gets dances if he's within a couple hours of going home/being around his SO. He's got more will power than I do.

I do! I also remember the Big Mac thing - Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame bun.

@Warrior - Ha! We're in the same boat!