[GTFIH] Weighted Lay Count, a Better Alternative to Body Count.

Budflog

Budflog

Iron
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Posts
87
Reputation
125
Recently this thread popped off, and a lot of people got to flex, or feel shame about their body count. Body count is dumb tho because as some users mentioned, they’ve fucked 20 land whales and nothing else. I propose instead a standardized system wherein the attractiveness of the body is taken fully into account. This is called weighted lay count.


To do this, first objectively evaluate the girl on a 5 average scale. 5 is average; below 5 is below average, above 5 is above average. A 10 is a once in a lifetime type girl, 8 PSL.


Assuming you would, on average, fuck average girls, a 5 is assigned 1 point. Each value from then on out is based on how impressive each lay is in relation to an average girl. Fucking 2 bland completely average girls is roughly equivalent to fucking one solidly above average 7. Keep in mind you have to adjust to the new scale wherein a 5 is a run of the mill, completely average female.


Here’s the Scale




1 = -.5

2 = 0

3 = 0

4 = .5

5 = 1

6 = 1.5

7 = 2

8 = 3

9 = 4

10 = 4.5



I personally have 6 lays, a 3, 4, 5, 6, 6 and 7. This puts me at 6.5.

You then do a ratio of your weighted lay count over your body count, so mine would be 6.5/6 or 1.08.

This ratio and your weighted lay count are what matter. A ratio above 1 is solid, above 1.5 is normie ish, above 2 chadlite, 3+ Chad.

Thoughts? What do your numbers convert to and what is your ratio?
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Yusu, Hightwolf and burner
Autism as its finnest
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: CANI, ezio6, 5'8manlet and 22 others
0
 
  • So Sad
Reactions: Deleted member 10536
Damn, @LondonVillie would have a ratio of -10
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: 5'8manlet, Deleted member 10107, Deleted member 9344 and 6 others
Nigg doing diferential equations on His Lay count

016E675A C10D 4F1F AEA0 F0CE12B648B5
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: 5'8manlet, Deleted member 9344, thecaste and 13 others
jfl
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Be_ConfidentBro
Nigg doing diferential equations on His Lay count

Shit took me like 5 minutes, I’ve always thought body count was dumb asf

I also am getting for autism in a few weeks but they have no correlation
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Be_ConfidentBro and Deleted member 5634
But to be honest OP if you Score a high tier stacy you Made It at life your a winner, muh i have fucked 30 bitches while all of them resemble a pig
 
  • +1
Reactions: Be_ConfidentBro, EdwardCullen, mulattomaxxer and 1 other person
But to be honest OP if you Score a high tier stacy you Made It at life your a winner, muh i have fucked 30 bitches while all of them resemble a pig

I mean yeah, always wanna do better tho.

kinda surprised at how shit this thread is doing lmao I think the concept is a good one and should be implemented
 
  • +1
Reactions: burner and Deleted member 5634
I agree should be weighted. That’s why I separated my 20+ fatties because those are all 1-3 no matter how pretty the faces were. Wouldn’t marry any if it were the last woman on the planet. Petite Asian wife or death.
 
  • +1
Reactions: RealLooksmaxxer
Previous lay count: 9
Adjust lay count: 5.5

neva had a 7PSL. Took one on a date before.
 
I mean yeah, always wanna do better tho.

kinda surprised at how shit this thread is doing lmao I think the concept is a good one and should be implemented

I think It should be based on the hottest girl you got tbh, im not a slayer tho, im shure Chad just pumps beckys between the ltrs with stacys. (As ive seen in real life)
 
Recently this thread popped off, and a lot of people got to flex, or feel shame about their body count. Body count is dumb tho because as some users mentioned, they’ve fucked 20 land whales and nothing else. I propose instead a standardized system wherein the attractiveness of the body is taken fully into account. This is called weighted lay count.


To do this, first objectively evaluate the girl on a 5 average scale. 5 is average; below 5 is below average, above 5 is above average. A 10 is a once in a lifetime type girl, 8 PSL.


Assuming you would, on average, fuck average girls, a 5 is assigned 1 point. Each value from then on out is based on how impressive each lay is in relation to an average girl. Fucking 2 bland completely average girls is roughly equivalent to fucking one solidly above average 7. Keep in mind you have to adjust to the new scale wherein a 5 is a run of the mill, completely average female.


Here’s the Scale




1 = -.5

2 = 0

3 = 0

4 = .5

5 = 1

6 = 1.5

7 = 2

8 = 3

9 = 4

10 = 4.5



I personally have 6 lays, a 3, 4, 5, 6, 6 and 7. This puts me at 6.5.

You then do a ratio of your weighted lay count over your body count, so mine would be 6.5/6 or 1.08.

This ratio and your weighted lay count are what matter. A ratio above 1 is solid, above 1.5 is normie ish, above 2 chadlite, 3+ Chad.

Thoughts? What do your numbers convert to and what is your ratio?

JFL at your math skills. Putting the body count number in the denominator.
 
JFL at your math skills. Putting the body count number in the denominator.

Obviously? Better the weighted score better the ratio. If i flipped it fucking two 10/10s would be a .11 ratio which sounds garbage. 9 ratio implies it’s good.
 
How it will help me to looksmax nigga?
 
  • +1
Reactions: mulattomaxxer
rep-post ratio is more accurate
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 5634 and Copeful
There is no reason for this, when people talk about their slay count they will usually mention it along with their best slays. Some people will also mention any ugly/fat women they have slayed but this rating system has little value. Your probably slaying your looksmatch so I assume your are having sex with people around your looks level. If your chad you can slay stacy, if your a high tier normie, you slay high tier becky's and if your a normie you can slay becky etc.

Also your system is flawed having values at 0 or negative. I am a virgin but my weighted slay count would mog somebody who has only had sex with subhumans. Additionally looks are somewhat subjective so unless you post each of your slays here to be objectively rated before calculation your score may be heavily inflated. A girl you rate an 7 may only be a 5 when rated objectively.

Overall there is no reason for you to calculate your weighted lay count. Just mention your slay count and the quality of your lays. That is what most normies do when you ask them how much sex they have had, they talk about their experiences after. They will often mention their best slays.
 
  • +1
Reactions: burner and Deleted member 756
I like mafs. It's so easy to do, too! You just put 0 everywhere and you get 0.
Feel like a genius. Jfl.
Fml, tbh.
Image
 
  • So Sad
Reactions: mulattomaxxer
I told you am not counting fatties lol.
5.5/9 is this how you calculate?

0.6 under
lmao i was saying the dude who called you out for shit rep didn’t realize you were on a burner. Yeah .6 would be eh you’re punching under average
 
Recently this thread popped off, and a lot of people got to flex, or feel shame about their body count. Body count is dumb tho because as some users mentioned, they’ve fucked 20 land whales and nothing else. I propose instead a standardized system wherein the attractiveness of the body is taken fully into account. This is called weighted lay count.


To do this, first objectively evaluate the girl on a 5 average scale. 5 is average; below 5 is below average, above 5 is above average. A 10 is a once in a lifetime type girl, 8 PSL.


Assuming you would, on average, fuck average girls, a 5 is assigned 1 point. Each value from then on out is based on how impressive each lay is in relation to an average girl. Fucking 2 bland completely average girls is roughly equivalent to fucking one solidly above average 7. Keep in mind you have to adjust to the new scale wherein a 5 is a run of the mill, completely average female.


Here’s the Scale




1 = -.5

2 = 0

3 = 0

4 = .5

5 = 1

6 = 1.5

7 = 2

8 = 3

9 = 4

10 = 4.5



I personally have 6 lays, a 3, 4, 5, 6, 6 and 7. This puts me at 6.5.

You then do a ratio of your weighted lay count over your body count, so mine would be 6.5/6 or 1.08.

This ratio and your weighted lay count are what matter. A ratio above 1 is solid, above 1.5 is normie ish, above 2 chadlite, 3+ Chad.

Thoughts? What do your numbers convert to and what is your ratio?
Men and how far they go for their egos...




giphy.gif
 
  • +1
Reactions: RealLooksmaxxer
lmao i was saying the dude who called you out for shit rep didn’t realize you were on a burner. Yeah .6 would be eh you’re punching under average
😉 because I’m tbh my SMV is low. I was bullied in school. I maxed just hard enough to get laid and that’s good enough for me. I just want to ascend hard enough to married a petite 7 and she not feel we don’t look match.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Budflog
garbage thread
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 756
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 756
because the number of women you slept with (attractive or not) doesn't necessarily indicate how attractive you are
Maybe, being nt plays a role as does luck
 
Looksmaxxing phd dissertation. They Will hire you at MIT
 
Peak autism :lul::lul:
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Yusu
hyperautism²
 

Similar threads

Canwefixit
Replies
27
Views
758
Hottaco34
Hottaco34
leftright
Replies
33
Views
2K
Oatriced
Oatriced
H
Replies
10
Views
746
grimy
grimy
Captain Albania
Replies
44
Views
778
socialcel
socialcel

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top