Garbage post about ranking chicks

Guys love numerical rankings and arguing over differences in rank, and we apply our natural inclination towards women: thus the well-known "Hot Babe" (HB) scale, although fortunately most guys aren't so anti-social that they say "HB." She's a "7" or maybe "low 7" or "high 7," not an "HB 7," unless the guy is even more peculiar than the average guy likely to be reading this.

These numbers don't really matter because any given chick is pretty much a binary, a 0 or 1... do you enjoy f**king her or not? Do you really look forward to doing her some more? Is she fun and exciting to you? Then that's all you need and what other guys say/think is irrelevant.

But, like I said, guys love ranking, so here goes: chicks below a 5 aren't even noticeable, typically because they're grossly fat, or old, or have something else seriously messed up about them. Few women are 3 or below, just as few women are 8 or above. A 5 is usually fat, old, or both, but has something redeeming that makes her of faint sexual interest. You'd probably want to deny f**king a 5 to your buddies, but she's not impossible. Trying to distinguish between a 3 versus a 4 is pretty pointless... who really cares?

A 6 is okay, and she may be pretty decent if you have strong chemistry with her, and, while there's typically something distinct off about her, you've probably done worse (I've done worse). If you're in a drought or you're sexually inexperienced, 6s might be great. Today, I have been turning down marginal notches, but as a younger guy I picked up many marginal notches and that was the right/smart thing to do, simply to build up my experience with women and my sexual skills. Although there's something off, there's also something distinctly alluring about a 6, so you should find that thing and focus on it, especially if you're inexperienced. I have had really good sexual chemistry with some 6s, so that I don't care about whether she’s a “6” or “7.” A 6 with strong carnal appetite can be very appealing. Some chicks underestimate the sheer appeal in a woman who loves to f**k.

While there are obviously exceptions, inexperienced guys often build up to high 7s, 8s, or 9s. How does a guy build experience? Sleep with more chicks. The more chicks a guy sleeps with, the more he realizes chicks are mere humans too and the better he understands female psychology (as well as sexuality/sex skills, which many guys are deficient in... a lot of chicks have never or rarely been f**ked to satiation, and when they are f**ked to satiation, it blows their minds and bodies). Chicks can also sense the desperation that comes off guys who don't get laid. If there are no chicks good enough for you, then you are either in an all-boys school, on a Navy warship, in prison, or in some other kind of military situation. For guys in normal social situations, there are going to be some chicks around who are or should be "good enough" for you. If none are "good enough," lower your supposed standards.

7s are average cute girls. You're happy to nail them. There are a huge number of 7s around. There's something distinctly attractive about a 7, and that something can be variable. Often it's youth and/or being height-weight proportionate. The variety of 7s make them hard to generalize about. They can be thin, they can be curvy (truly curvy... not fat). They can be tall or short. They can have great faces and okay bodies or great bodies and okay faces.

8s are like 7s but with good proportions... nothing is out of place. Her face is usually nice, or, if it's not very good, it's at least distinctive in a good way. Very few 8s persist past age 30. 8s are also uncommon... maybe they are more common in Eastern Europe... I don't have access to many 8s, and I'm usually suspicious of online guys who say they're routinely getting with 8s. That's not impossible, especially for a good-looking, social guy in college or right after... just not real likely. Most guys like to inflate the value of a given chick, particularly if other guys online will never see her. 8s are not readily available to me. I can get there, but not every day. If I were exclusively chasing true 8s, I'd not have had nearly the quantity or quality of sex I've had in my life.

9s are like 8s but with ideal, hourglass proportions, youth, and a pretty, symmetrical face. Very few 9s persist past age 26, and almost none past age 29. 9s are rare. If a guy claims to be regularly dating a bevy of 9s, he has an inflated sense of value or is himself very rare, like a high-level entertainer, etc. I see, anywhere, very few 9s. Unless a guy works in something like fashion, beauty, acting, etc., he is not going to meet many 9s. Once you get into the high-8, low-9 territory, distinctions also stop mattering very much... she is really f**king hot. Debating whether she's a "high 8" or 9... pointless. Every straight man wants her.

10s... can't change a thing. Not sure they really exist. I've heard guys say, "a 10 is an 8 or 9 you haven't f**ked." Makes sense to me.

Most of the chicks I've been with have been 7s. Cute chicks I'm happy to be with but not all that special in pure looks terms.

In my view, you can't properly rank/rate a chick till you've seen her nude. I've seen hundreds, maybe thousands, of chicks nude, live in person (have not f**ked the vast majority of them, but I have seen them via sex clubs). Clothed chicks can go either way... sometimes up a point or two because they're wearing baggy/unflattering clothes, or are just tight all round, or sometimes the opposite way, because they're wearing flattering clothes, push-up bras, etc. I've initially thought a chick is a basic 7 only to find a high 8 underneath those clothes... and I love that feeling. Opposite happens too, though, as it did with Low-cut top girl recently.

How a chick looks is also correlated to, but not perfectly linear with, sexual chemistry. I've found high 6s and low 7s with whom I have better sexual chemistry than 8s, but, obviously, it's very satisfying to f**k a really hot chick. Some guys also say really hot chicks are worse in bed... I may have once believed that, but, as I became more sexually dominant with practice, I stopped believed it, since now I tell a girl where to go and what to do. If she's on her knees or bent over a couch, with a handful of her hair in my fist, she will likely perform just fine. Some girls do require a bit of training, and in my experience the first/second times having sex are almost never the BEST times. Usually it takes 3 – 10 times to really  get in sync.

Better yet, if a girl is "bad" in bed, I don't tell her what to do, I pick her up and put her where I want her. Or I tie her up, put cuffs on her, blindfold her, and play with her until she's in a deep sexual state. It's been a while since I've had truly bad sex. To me, bad sex used to happen when I was uncertain and the girl was uncertain, inexperienced, etc. Just being dominant and directive is not enough to ensure GREAT sex, but it can bring almost any acceptably hot and willing girl up to "pretty good."

Chicks know / can sense this. Chicks like it when they can tell the guy sort of expects to get laid, but, at the same time, he's not real bothered if he doesn't. He knows that he's going to have sex with some girl, soon. He'll get the chick next time, or, if she wanders off, he'll get someone else. That's the right attitude to have. Not demanding, but lightly worn expectation. I can't precisely describe how to cultivate this aura. Many guys, I think, are kind of waiting for the chick to take the lead... which she will never do... and the chick herself is often nervous and doesn't know what to do, and less experienced guys will interpret this as "bad" sex. To me, bad sex happens when I discover the girl is less hot than I thought she was, or smells less good than I want, and I've lost some of my interest in her.