A forumla is needed to weigh someone's looks factoring face + height

[6ft4]

Bro just be 6'3 HTN
Bro just be 0.3% of males to not get mogged
State of this forum

Having read this comment it brought up something I had been thinking about before
Just taking someone's height rarity and multiplying it by their face rarity isn't optimal for finding the amount of people they mog since you are disqualifying all shorter men from mogging them which isn't how it works irl
There will be a chunk of men from 5'10-6'2 who facemog the 6'3 enough whereby they mog the 6'3 guy overall

Also HTN is quite vague since some people say HTN starts around 80th percentile but doesn't end until 98.9th percentile by virtue of Chadlite beginning at 99th percentile.

Then some people say HTN starts at 90th percenitle while some say Chadlite starts at 90th-95th percentile

Assuming a rating system where both an 80th and 94th percentile guy are considered HTN, the 94th percentile face at 5'10 is more attractive overall and will get more foid attention than an 80th percentile face with the ideal height of 6'4.0" to 6'4.9"

I decided to make a chart where each face percentile and height combo equates to a score

In green is my score of 880 having an 88th percentile face and 194cm evening height
In light blue are guys I would have equivalent looks level to overall and red are the guys who mog me by a whisker
The purple in the left corner is my nemesis: The mythical 5'8 MTN who I mog by all physical metrics but by virtue of the the simulation controller deciding to fuck with me, he outcompetes me for foids

So the guys who I am on par with are
90th percentile face, 189cm height
92nd percentile face 185cm height
94th percentile face 181cm height
96th percentile face 177.5cm height
98th percentile face 175.5cm height

I didn't go beyond 98th percentile face because 99+ is big boy territory that can turn the chart forumla on it's head
There may be a mistake in the chart somewhere but I think it holds up pretty well in it's first version form
I may end up weighting things differently as I progress with the idea

 

[Bozoogway]

@ascension

 

[Lynxress]

 

[6ft4]

Someone try find a set of matching scores on the chart where you disagree with the hypothetical chaps behind those scores being equal in value

 

[socialcel]

high IQ thread, but 2 questions

1. Based on what can you objectively determine your face percentile? Imo it would be near impossible to distinguish between an 80% and 86% face, but this chart states there’s a big difference between the 2 in terms of actual smv.

2. Do you really think a 90th percentile face on a 173cm guy mogs an 80th percentile face on a 193cm guy? From my irl experiences I would disagree, first because 173cm is indeed manlet tier in lots of countries and both 80th and 90th percentile faces will be considered attractive by the vast majority of the population. Maybe I’m just a coping tallfag, but would be interesting to hear your opinion.

ps. I think you might’ve put 955 as a mistake in the chart? seems like it now that I’m looking at it

 

[6ft4]

high IQ thread, but 2 questions

1. Based on what can you objectively determine your face percentile? Imo it would be near impossible to distinguish between an 80% and 86% face, but this chart states there’s a big difference between the 2 in terms of actual smv.

Does it state there's a big difference?
I think for the formula to apply when looking at guys from varying ends of the height v face values, you needs to have those differences between guys who are close together where it may seem negligable
I dont think you can consciously tell an 80th and 86th face guy apart when walking down the street but if you had 100 men and had to order them from 1-100 based on face it could be done

2. Do you really think a 90th percentile face on a 173cm guy mogs an 80th percentile face on a 193cm guy? From my irl experiences I would disagree, first because 173cm is indeed manlet tier in lots of countries and both 80th and 90th percentile faces will be considered attractive by the vast majority of the population. Maybe I’m just a coping tallfag, but would be interesting to hear your opinion.

ps. I think you might’ve put 955 as a mistake in the chart? seems like it now that I’m looking at it

Error in the chart as you pointed out

90th % face 173cm(5'8) guy would be equivalent to 80th % face 188cm(6'2) guy
I think a 1 in 10 face rarity 5'8 guy can get results on par 1 in 5 face face rarity 6'2 guy (where 5'10 is average)

I was basing this forumla off of 178cm being the average height, as you can see on the chart, each loss in cm is -10 points below 178 whereas it's 5 points when above 178

In a country where the average is 183 like the netherlands, I would put every cm under 183 as -10

 

[socialcel]

Does it state there's a big difference?

Isn’t 100 points very substantial? I just assumed it is, but you’re the one who made the chart so I’m obviously not sure, just seems like it is.

90th % face 173cm(5'8) guy would be equivalent to 80th % face 188cm(6'2) guy
I think a 1 in 10 face rarity 5'8 guy can get results on par 1 in 5 face face rarity 6'2 guy (where 5'10 is average)

Can you post a picture of a 1/10 and 1/5 guy?

I was basing this forumla off of 178cm being the average height, as you can see on the chart, each loss in cm is -10 points below 178 whereas it's 5 points when above 178

In a country where the average is 183 like the netherlands, I would put every cm under 183 as -10

Makes sense.

 

[Bojack]

just dont take any medications and run lots of mileage. Oh and don't eat to much food and you should be good to go.

 

[Bozoogway]

just dont take any medications and run lots of mileage. Oh and don't eat to much food and you should be good to go.

and use the LOA most importantly

 

[Bojack]

and use the LOA most importantly

yes that too

 

[6ft4]

Isn’t 100 points very substantial? I just assumed it is, but you’re the one who made the chart so I’m obviously not sure, just seems like it is.

There's 100 points between an 80th percentile face guy and 90th percentile face guy of the same height
So how ever big that looks difference is to you in your mind, that's what 100 points are worth

Can you post a picture of a 1/10 and 1/5 guy?

After attempting to do so, its too difficult to be precise but will do it in future

 

[ConfusedBolivian]

Having read this comment it brought up something I had been thinking about before
Just taking someone's height rarity and multiplying it by their face rarity isn't optimal for finding the amount of people they mog since you are disqualifying all shorter men from mogging them which isn't how it works irl
There will be a chunk of men from 5'10-6'2 who facemog the 6'3 enough whereby they mog the 6'3 guy overall

Also HTN is quite vague since some people say HTN starts around 80th percentile but doesn't end until 98.9th percentile by virtue of Chadlite beginning at 99th percentile.

Then some people say HTN starts at 90th percenitle while some say Chadlite starts at 90th-95th percentile

Assuming a rating system where both an 80th and 94th percentile guy are considered HTN, the 94th percentile face at 5'10 is more attractive overall and will get more foid attention than an 80th percentile face with the ideal height of 6'4.0" to 6'4.9"

I decided to make a chart where each face percentile and height combo equates to a score

View attachment 2783038

In green is my score of 880 having an 88th percentile face and 194cm evening height
In light blue are guys I would have equivalent looks level to overall and red are the guys who mog me by a whisker
The purple in the left corner is my nemesis: The mythical 5'8 MTN who I mog by all physical metrics but by virtue of the the simulation controller deciding to fuck with me, he outcompetes me for foids

So the guys who I am on par with are
90th percentile face, 189cm height
92nd percentile face 185cm height
94th percentile face 181cm height
96th percentile face 177.5cm height
98th percentile face 175.5cm height

I didn't go beyond 98th percentile face because 99+ is big boy territory that can turn the chart forumla on it's head
There may be a mistake in the chart somewhere but I think it holds up pretty well in it's first version form
I may end up weighting things differently as I progress with the idea

Cooe height isnt that important

 

[Deleted member 51781]

Cooe height isnt that important

Seething manlet. Keep coping.

 

[Rotter]

Having read this comment it brought up something I had been thinking about before
Just taking someone's height rarity and multiplying it by their face rarity isn't optimal for finding the amount of people they mog since you are disqualifying all shorter men from mogging them which isn't how it works irl
There will be a chunk of men from 5'10-6'2 who facemog the 6'3 enough whereby they mog the 6'3 guy overall

Also HTN is quite vague since some people say HTN starts around 80th percentile but doesn't end until 98.9th percentile by virtue of Chadlite beginning at 99th percentile.

Then some people say HTN starts at 90th percenitle while some say Chadlite starts at 90th-95th percentile

Assuming a rating system where both an 80th and 94th percentile guy are considered HTN, the 94th percentile face at 5'10 is more attractive overall and will get more foid attention than an 80th percentile face with the ideal height of 6'4.0" to 6'4.9"

I decided to make a chart where each face percentile and height combo equates to a score

View attachment 2783038

In green is my score of 880 having an 88th percentile face and 194cm evening height
In light blue are guys I would have equivalent looks level to overall and red are the guys who mog me by a whisker
The purple in the left corner is my nemesis: The mythical 5'8 MTN who I mog by all physical metrics but by virtue of the the simulation controller deciding to fuck with me, he outcompetes me for foids

So the guys who I am on par with are
90th percentile face, 189cm height
92nd percentile face 185cm height
94th percentile face 181cm height
96th percentile face 177.5cm height
98th percentile face 175.5cm height

I didn't go beyond 98th percentile face because 99+ is big boy territory that can turn the chart forumla on it's head
There may be a mistake in the chart somewhere but I think it holds up pretty well in it's first version form
I may end up weighting things differently as I progress with the idea

https://looksmax.org/threads/use-st...-face-vs-height-slayers-between-2-8sd.999836/ This post may be what you're looking for, basically just turn percentiles into Z scores, sum them up for a score. For a percentile divide the new combined Z score by the square root of variables

 

[MoggsWithBoness]

Just use the simple standard deviations table lol

Htn is top 13%
Chadlite is top 2%
Chad is top 0.5%

 

[InnerVoid]

autismmax.org