Boymaxxing vs Gymmaxxing what do girls prefer: Tinder experiment in Japan.

[Nibba]

@11gaijin jfc at the cope in this thread lmao. Gym is legit

 

[11gaijin]

@11gaijin jfc at the cope in this thread lmao. Gym is legit

Can't believe how much anti gym copers cope. I think some people take the gym thing too far and hope that gym will instantly get them bitches or how women lust for muscular men. That can be called cope. But to say that a Hollywood physique is not going to increase your SMV is totally retarded.

 

[Nibba]

Can't believe how much anti gym copers cope. I think some people take the gym thing too far and hope that gym will instantly get them bitches or how women lust for muscular men. That can be called cope. But to say that a Hollywood physique is not going to increase your SMV is totally retarded.

Exactly. Yeah 2/10 face on roids is just an ogre. But 4+ works nicely. You simply can't argue that gymcelling doesn't help you, especially with confidence

 

[11gaijin]

Exactly. Yeah 2/10 face on roids is just an ogre. But 4+ works nicely. You simply can't argue that gymcelling doesn't help you, especially with confidence

Exactly, even clothes look better on you. Casino Royale always comes to my mind.

This polo shirt will not look as good on Craig without that body. Arms will look like sticks.

 

[Nibba]

Exactly, even clothes look better on you. Casino Royale always comes to my mind.

This polo shirt will not look as good on Craig without that body. Arms will look like sticks.

Mirin bicep vein. Tbh that shit is genetic I have big ass arms but don't have that

 

[11gaijin]

Mirin bicep vein. Tbh that shit is genetic I have big ass arms but don't have that

yeah but I was talking about the biceps. Better having them than having skinny arms.

 

[Nibba]

yeah but I was talking about the biceps. Better having them than having skinny arms.

Yeah ik I was just mirin the vein

 

[Deleted member 611]

legit thread. the average blonde white guy would mog both imo

 

[SquareChinOrDeath]

Exactly, even clothes look better on you. Casino Royale always comes to my mind.

This polo shirt will not look as good on Craig without that body. Arms will look like sticks.

Square chin and neck tbh
srs

 

[itsOVER]

Because it is Japan. If I do this experiment in the West or South East Asia the differences would be much more obvious. Since xenophobia won't play a role.

What if I told you the guy in these pics is the same?

View attachment 6996

View attachment 6997

View attachment 6998

I want to hear your excuse in this case. Let us see how you cope here.

I have used this same guy on Tinder for lots of experiments in fact this guy made me blackpilled coz he got lot of matches and I understood the difference in being good looking and average or below average looking.

With the below pic, where his face isn't even visible he did the best. Can you explain why?
View attachment 7001

@Felix97

Boyo, your experiment proved, in this case, that gymcelling does not help. You tried claiming the opposite initially, but it's good to see we're finally on the same page at least - that 'in Japan', gymcelling didn't help.

Now, if you want to try and prove it helps in the West, in South America, in Africa, in SEA or anywhere else you so choose, you'll have to run another experiment to prove that. You can't just use this experiment (where gymcelling failed) and then say that proves that gymcelling is legit in other places.

To reiterate: your own experiment proved in this case (Japan) that gymcelling was no benefit whatsoever. If you want to claim it helps in another country, then a seperate experiment is needed to prove that. How you can use your FAILED experiment here to claim that gymcelling would be a success elsewhere is quite frankly beyond me.

As for that other guy:

1) No proof of your claims ---> no care.
2) A 1.6 difference in rating is hardly something out of this world, or neccesarily explainable by body. I've had MUCH more variance than 1.6 on my pics on photofeeler, and none of my pics are gymcelled or showing body.
3) Given you don't appear to understand the concept of statistical significance, it's possible that his matches - if indeed higher - are not high enough vs non-gymcelled pics to be statistically relevant. See: your claim that 56 vs 52 actually means anything in your first experiment, which is nonsense to anyone with a basic understanding of statistics.

 

[11gaijin]

Boyo, your experiment proved, in this case, that gymcelling does not help. You tried claiming the opposite initially, but it's good to see we're finally on the same page at least - that 'in Japan', gymcelling didn't help.

Now, if you want to try and prove it helps in the West, in South America, in Africa, in SEA or anywhere else you so choose, you'll have to run another experiment to prove that. You can't just use this experiment (where gymcelling failed) and then say that proves that gymcelling is legit in other places.

To reiterate: your own experiment proved in this case (Japan) that gymcelling was no benefit whatsoever. If you want to claim it helps in another country, then a seperate experiment is needed to prove that. How you can use your FAILED experiment here to claim that gymcelling would be a success elsewhere is quite frankly beyond me.

As for that other guy:

1) No proof of your claims ---> no care.
2) A 1.6 difference in rating is hardly something out of this world, or neccesarily explainable by body. I've had MUCH more variance than 1.6 on my pics on photofeeler, and none of my pics are gymcelled or showing body.
3) Given you don't appear to understand the concept of statistical significance, it's possible that his matches - if indeed higher - are not high enough vs non-gymcelled pics to be statistically relevant. See: your claim that 56 vs 52 actually means anything in your first experiment, which is nonsense to anyone with a basic understanding of statistics.

You have very low IQ I think that is why you have difficulty understanding what is being said. A 1.6 difference in rating is hardly anything? Now you need a 5 point difference to prove gymcelling works. Very good Einstein. I got the answer.

 

[itsOVER]

You have very low IQ I think that is why you have difficulty understanding what is being said. A 1.6 difference in rating is hardly anything? Now you need a 5 point difference to prove gymcelling works. Very good Einstein. I got the answer.

Muh ad homs. Gymcels never change.

 

[11gaijin]

Muh ad homs. Gymcels never change.

Not even a gymcel but you don't need to be one to see that it works especially if you have an above average face.

 

[SubhumanOverload]

The Indian guy is so ascended this isn’t a fair comparison tbh

 

[Nibba]

Not even a gymcel but you don't need to be one to see that it works especially if you have an above average face.

Can u just ban him already

 

[11gaijin]

The Indian guy is so ascended this isn’t a fair comparison tbh

I don't think that in the opening pic you see his face that clearly and other features too. I didn't want to focus on the face and that pic mostly focuses on his body.

 

[11gaijin]

Can u just ban him already

He hasn't violated any rules.

 

[SubhumanOverload]

Can u just ban him already

How long you been gymcelling boyo

 

[Nibba]

How long you been gymcelling boyo

I began freshman year of high school lifting with my teammates (function vs hypertrophy). After senior year of hs I started seriously lifting for bodybuilding. So I'd say 9 months serious lifting

 

[itsOVER]

Not even a gymcel but you don't need to be one to see that it works especially if you have an above average face.

You gymcels are all the same tbh. I can always predict how a conversation will go with a gymcel. They basically use the following buzzwords and phrases rather than actually forming arguments:

1) Twink
2) 'I could beat you up IRL'
3) Lazy
4) Faggot
5) Low T
6) Beta
7) Weak
8) Pathetic
9) How do you know gym doesn't work if you never tried it?
10) [If you did try the gym] You're just bitter it didn't work for you bro!
11) Gym works if you have a good face, good muscle insertions and are tall! (Just be Chad bro and the gym will 'work'!)

Notice how all of the above just attack the poster, not the post, or in the case of 9) and 10) employ an 'argument' where the gymcel always has a cope to fall back on. 11 is just plain retarded but it's used plenty in gymcel arguments as 'evidence' the gym works. Indeed, you used 11 yourself.

Your own experiment that you posted in this very thread shows that a guy with a gymcelled body got the same matches as a non gymcel. You thought that 'proved' gymcelling was legit, however when I arrived on the scene with the actual logic (equvivilant matches do not indicate a benefit at all), you switched it up with muh xenophobia, muh it'd-work-in-other-countries, both of which have no proof backing them at all.

 

[11gaijin]

You gymcels are all the same tbh. I can always predict how a conversation will go with a gymcel. They basically use the following buzzwords and phrases rather than actually forming arguments:

1) Twink
2) 'I could beat you up IRL'
3) Lazy
4) Faggot
5) Low T
6) Beta
7) Weak
8) Pathetic
9) How do you know gym doesn't work if you never tried it?
10) [If you did try the gym] You're just bitter it didn't work for you bro!
11) Gym works if you have a good face, good muscle insertions and are tall! (Just be Chad bro and the gym will 'work'!)

Notice how all of the above just attack the poster, not the post, or in the case of 9) and 10) employ an 'argument' where the gymcel always has a cope to fall back on. 11 is just plain retarded but it's used plenty in gymcel arguments as 'evidence' the gym works. Indeed, you used 11 yourself.

Your own experiment that you posted in this very thread shows that a guy with a gymcelled body got the same matches as a non gymcel. You thought that 'proved' gymcelling was legit, however when I arrived on the scene with the actual logic (equvivilant matches do not indicate a benefit at all), you switched it up with muh xenophobia, muh it'd-work-in-other-countries, both of which have no proof backing them at all.

What about the pics that I posted? You just ignored it by saying 1.6 point difference isn't enough. That is your "actual logic"?

 

[itsOVER]

What about the pics that I posted? You just ignored it by saying 1.6 point difference isn't enough. That is your "actual logic"?

1.6 difference isn't particularly significant, no - especially if this is from a small sample of votes. I've got more variance with my own pics on pf after 40 votes - i.e. the 'precise' level (none of which showed body, just face at different angles/lighting etc).

You'd also have to isolate the 'body' factor to determine whether it was the body that caused this increase, or something else. Like I say, things such as lighting, photo quality, and angle can make large differences as well. You'd need a pic of a guy with his clothes on, then a pic of the same guy, in the same situation, in the same lighting with his shirt off (i.e. pretty much 2 pics taken at the same time/place/angle, just in the second pic he removed his shirt).

If that all sounds like 'cope' or whatever, so be it, but it's how actual scientific experiments are conducted in the real world by those who want their findings to be taken seriously.

No isolation of the target construct = the 'research' is laughed out of town.
Findings do not show statistical significance = the research is deemed inconclusive.

 

[11gaijin]

1.6 difference isn't particularly significant, no - especially if this is from a small sample of votes. I've got more variance with my own pics on pf after 40 votes - i.e. the 'precise' level (none of which showed body, just face at different angles/lighting etc).

You'd also have to isolate the 'body' factor to determine whether it was the body that caused this increase, or something like. Like I say, things such as lighting, photo quality, and angle can make large differences as well. You'd need a pic of a guy with his clothes on, then a pic of the same guy, in the same situation, in the same lighting with his shirt off (i.e. pretty much 2 pics taken at the same time/place/angle, just in the second pic he removed his shirt).

If that all sounds like 'cope' or whatever, so be it, but it's how actual scientific experiments are conducted in the real world by those who want their findings to be taken seriously.

No isolation of the target construct = the 'research' is laughed out of town.
Findings do not show statistical significance = the research is deemed inconclusive.

You got more variance with your pics doesn't prove anything. It just proves that girls found one pic to be better than the other which happens all the time with me. Two of my highest rated pics on photofeeler are what get me most matches on Tinder. In this case they found the black and white pic which just shows his body better than others that clearly show his face.

Obviously you can sing this same guy same lightining, same situation song because you know that people here don't have the resources to do an experiment like that. However I would like to know what caused women to rate a colourless body pic more than the other colourful ones showing face.

This guy used to get 25+ matches in a day in cities like London, Manchester in a day. I have seen your pics and your physique and I doubt that if you were to pose like that in the pool you would get that many matches in those white majority cities. We both know this fact very well. Neither will I get that many matches with my current body. And let us not delude ourselves the face is hardly visible there. Women swipe right on the basis of the body. If it weren't so you and I would be slaying in London with such pics.

 

[itsOVER]

You got more variance with your pics doesn't prove anything. It just proves that girls found one pic to be better than the other which happens all the time with me. Two of my highest rated pics on photofeeler are what get me most matches on Tinder. In this case they found the black and white pic which just shows his body better than others that clearly show his face.

Obviously you can sing this same guy same lightining, same situation song because you know that people here don't have the resources to do an experiment like that. However I would like to know what caused women to rate a colourless body pic more than the other colourful ones showing face.

This guy used to get 25+ matches in a day in cities like London, Manchester in a day. I have seen your pics and your physique and I doubt that if you were to pose like that in the pool you would get that many matches in those white majority cities. We both know this fact very well. Neither will I get that many matches with my current body. And let us not delude ourselves the face is hardly visible there. Women swipe right on the basis of the body. If it weren't so you and I would be slaying in London with such pics.
View attachment 7008

What do you mean we don't have the resources? There's tons of gymcopers here, one of them could volunteer. All they'd have to do is take a pic with their shirt on, then another pic in the same situation with their shirt off, we'll put them both on photofeeler, wait until both have 40 votes (more would be better tbh but it'd take ages) and compare results.

The fact I got more variance with my own pics means that you can't necessarily say that in your pics, the body was the sole reason for the increased scores. A lot goes into whether a pic is deemed good or bad, and you need a lot of votes before it approaches reliability.

Whether you, I, or anyone else would get 'x' matches in 'y' city is totally irrelevant as to whether gym is cope. His face might not be fully visible, but even here you can imagine him looking decent. Plus it's possible he had other pics that did show his face, I don't know. Finally, as one can only judge the body, one only swipes left or right based on it, probably hoping that the face matches the physique (which they'll want to verify before meeting up, of course).

 

[11gaijin]

What do you mean we don't have the resources? There's tons of gymcopers here, one of them could volunteer. All they'd have to do is take a pic with their shirt on, then another pic in the same situation with their shirt off, we'll put them both on photofeeler, wait until both have 40 votes (more would be better tbh but it'd take ages) and compare results.

Whether you, I, or anyone else would get 'x' matches in 'y' city is totally irrelevant as to whether gym is cope. His face might not be fully visible, but even here you can imagine him looking decent. Plus it's possible he had other pics that did show his face, I don't know. Finally, as one can only judge the body, one only swipes left or right based on it, probably hoping that the face matches the physique (which they'll want to verify before meeting up, of course).

@Deltoid already did an experiment like this. He gots lots of matches due to his body. Even made a thread about that.

Finally, as one can only judge the body, one only swipes left or right based on it- I thought body didn't matter at all.

 

[itsOVER]

@Deltoid already did an experiment like this. He gots lots of matches due to his body. Even made a thread about that.

Finally, as one can only judge the body, one only swipes left or right based on it- I thought body didn't matter at all.

It doesn't. I've tried explaining this to wincel. Just because you swipe left or right based on a single factor doesn't make that factor have significance.

The example I used was eye colour. Let's say you prefer green eyes on a foid. If you were shown some eye pics, zoomed it so close you could only judge colour, you'd preferentially pick the green ones. But that wouldn't lend itself to a conclusion that 'eye colour is very important as a determiner of attractiveness' - it just simply means you only had access to a very limited sample of information and had to base your decision off that.

Did Deltoid do an experiment with his shirt on, pics in the same pose and in the same location, then another experiment with his shirt off? No, no he didn't. He did an experiment showing his pics showing face and body, and got some matches - which proves nothing, as the target construct wasn't isolated (we can easily say he got matches due to face, and you could say it was due to body, but there'd be no evidence of either, and so the 'experiment' was garbage).

 

[Deleted member 206]

1.6 difference isn't particularly significant, no - especially if this is from a small sample of votes. I've got more variance with my own pics on pf after 40 votes - i.e. the 'precise' level (none of which showed body, just face at different angles/lighting etc).

You'd also have to isolate the 'body' factor to determine whether it was the body that caused this increase, or something else. Like I say, things such as lighting, photo quality, and angle can make large differences as well. You'd need a pic of a guy with his clothes on, then a pic of the same guy, in the same situation, in the same lighting with his shirt off (i.e. pretty much 2 pics taken at the same time/place/angle, just in the second pic he removed his shirt).

If that all sounds like 'cope' or whatever, so be it, but it's how actual scientific experiments are conducted in the real world by those who want their findings to be taken seriously.

No isolation of the target construct = the 'research' is laughed out of town.
Findings do not show statistical significance = the research is deemed inconclusive.

 

[11gaijin]

It doesn't. I've tried explaining this to wincel. Just because you swipe left or right based on a single factor doesn't make that factor have significance.

The example I used was eye colour. Let's say you prefer green eyes on a foid. If you were shown some eye pics, zoomed it so close you could only judge colour, you'd preferentially pick the green ones. But that wouldn't lend itself to a conclusion that 'eye colour is very important as a determiner of attractiveness' - it just simply means you only had access to a very limited sample of information and had to base your decision off that.

Did Deltoid do an experiment with his shirt on, pics in the same pose and in the same location, then another experiment with his shirt off? No, no he didn't. He did an experiment showing his pics showing face and body, and got some matches - which proves nothing, as the target construct wasn't isolated (we can easily say he got matches due to face, and you could say it was due to body, but there'd be no evidence of either, and so the 'experiment' was garbage).

You chose eye color which is a big halo among the general normie population. Average normie will judge you more on the basis of eye color rather than canthal tilt or eyelid exposure. Of course eye color has significance. Might not have the same significance as your entire face or height but it is a halo and 2 guys all same one having brown eyes and one having green, I am sure which one would be preferred. Not sure what more to say, your arguments don't make sense to me. If you had chosen another features say eyelashes it would make sense. But eye color is a very popular feature.

About the experiment, @Deltoid can tell more when he is online.

 

[itsOVER]

You chose eye color which is a big halo among the general normie population. Average normie will judge you more on the basis of eye color rather than canthal tilt or eyelid exposure. Of course eye color has significance. Might not have the same significance as your entire face or height but it is a halo and 2 guys all same one having brown eyes and one having green, I am sure which one would be preferred. Not sure what more to say, your arguments don't make sense to me. If you had chosen another features say eyelashes it would make sense. But eye color is a very popular feature.

About the experiment, @Deltoid can tell more when he is online.

The point is boyo, if you are given one variable, and one variable alone, you can only use that info to choose whether to swipe left or right. It doesn't neccesarily follow that this variable is an important determiner of attractiveness.

I remember Deltoids 'experiment', which wasn't even an experiment, more a 'hey look at the matches i get guys!'. He had full pics, showing both face and body, and erroneously concluded from that that body was important.

 

[Deleted member 281]

It doesn't. I've tried explaining this to wincel. Just because you swipe left or right based on a single factor doesn't make that factor have significance.

The example I used was eye colour. Let's say you prefer green eyes on a foid. If you were shown some eye pics, zoomed it so close you could only judge colour, you'd preferentially pick the green ones. But that wouldn't lend itself to a conclusion that 'eye colour is very important as a determiner of attractiveness' - it just simply means you only had access to a very limited sample of information and had to base your decision off that.

Did Deltoid do an experiment with his shirt on, pics in the same pose and in the same location, then another experiment with his shirt off? No, no he didn't. He did an experiment showing his pics showing face and body, and got some matches - which proves nothing, as the target construct wasn't isolated (we can easily say he got matches due to face, and you could say it was due to body, but there'd be no evidence of either, and so the 'experiment' was garbage).

Okay, let's look at it from your point of view, I like girls with big butts, I prefer big butts, doesn't mean I dont care about the girl's face, the face matters ofcourse, but so does the butt. Since I prefer the bigger asses rather than smaller, this means a girl with an average face and small butt will not be as attractive to me as a girl with a average face but big butt. The one with the bigger butt will be more attractive.

The same your gymcelled version of you will be more attractive than your non gymcelled version of you, cause women prefer muscle, as proved by the Omegle videos I posted.

 

[11gaijin]

Okay, let's look at it from your point of view, I like girls with big butts, I prefer big butts, doesn't mean I dont care about the girl's face, the face matters ofcourse, but so does the butt. Since I prefer the bigger asses rather than smaller, this means a girl with an average face and small butt will not be as attractive to me as a girl with a average face but big butt. The one with the bigger butt will be more attractive.

The same your gymcelled version of you will be more attractive than your non gymcelled version of you, cause women prefer muscle, as proved by the Omegle videos I posted.

To think that Zyzz would be as famous as he is if not for his body is pure cope. Even that guy knew it matters but Incels on this forum don't lol.

 

[Deleted member 3526]

bump

 

[SMVbender]

Look how people write down essays on a offtopic thread.

People here become low iq by time indeed

 

[Moggy]

Legit my own experiments back this up.