SG's Babe Competition 2013

[yoyo913]

I agree with jschuck's rating of 2 for the above woman.

 

[Back Door Skip]

In the internet grading system she's in the negatives. Although I mostly agree with your grading scale.

 

[yoyo913]

Dammit, there is no negative! That over-complicates thing. If you're that disgusted a 1 would suffice.

 

[RobbieD_PL]

Apparently, it's hard enough as it is with just a scale of 10.

 

[jschuck12001]

I could see Granny ass being a 0 but I agree with Sir D we need a universal grading system.

 

[Mandieta6]

I always equate 'D' with "she wants the D". It's why I love our large number of D-sporting members (Sir D, RobbieD, Sean D (and even if he doesn't have it in his username, you know it's really Shifty*reitzD).

 

[Alex]

I am very in-tune with my rating scale:

1: you question God's cruelty
2: disguising
3: very ugly
4: clear physical trait that makes her unattractive
5: not attractive, with nice personality you might think she's ok for a date, but you would regret it
6: meh, might be ok but nothing to get excited for, average(or slightly below), has some attractive traits but also some unattractive ones (about 50-50)
7: pretty, slightly above average, cute, would go on a date with, mostly attractive
8: very pretty, hot-ish
9: stunning, hot, could be a model if she tried
10: phenomenal specimen, cannot believe such beauty exists

What is her disguise?

 

[Alex]

The trouble with the grading system being out of ten, is that people think if somebody is slightly hotter than someone else, they need to be rated higher. Obviously this is impossible with only ten numbers to draw from. That's why quite a few people seem to only reserve the lower echelons for "would not bang". It gives them a larger scale to work with to distinguish those they would.

The issue with this theory is everyone has a different standard of would-not-bangers. People like skip would bang anything, others would only bang girls they actually find attractive. The other issue with such a scale is when someone rates two different would-not-bangers as the same, and they're asked how they could possibly rate them same, when A is clearly uglier than B. Again this is an issue with the scale of ten.

 

[Mandieta6]

Just use decimals.

 

[MaestroZidane]

 

[jschuck12001]

That's why quite a few people seem to only reserve the lower echelons for "would not bang".

Skips just being honest and everyone else is full of shit. Bottom line is if that chick I posted walked into AZ's room butt naked he probably blows his load before he gets his pants off.

 

[Mandieta6]

Are you just ignoring my posts like Moanah? Go read. That said, in all seriousness, she is not THAT hot. Very hot, hotter than most people you see on the street, certainly, but the face is nothing special and can even be considered a negative, the ass is meh and the tits are fake.

Kelly Brook is damn hot.

 

[MaestroZidane]

I'm glad I didn't have to post a name

 

[yoyo913]

Just use decimals.

This.

What is her disguise?

Good one.

 

[jschuck12001]

Are you just ignoring my posts like Moanah? Go read. That said, in all seriousness, she is not THAT hot. Very hot, hotter than most people you see on the street, certainly, but the face is nothing special and can even be considered a negative, the ass is meh and the tits are fake.

Kelly Brook is damn hot.

Not at all, just a difference of opinion not a personal attack.

The funny thing about fake boobs is they always look good no matter how old they are. I used to do sales for a cardiovascular screening company out of Maryland and the techs had to have the women remove their shirt and bra when doing the echo. Every once in a while I would catch a glimpse of a 60 year old set of fake tits and its crazy because everything except the tits looks old and droopy and then you see this nice fake rack, its odd and catches you off-guard when you first see it.

 

[chygry]

Every once in a while I would catch a glimpse of a 60 year old set of fake tits...

Right, "catch a glimpse". You pervert!

 

[MaestroZidane]

nothing wrong with catching a glimpse, but it's one sight I find disturbing, specially if the body already is beginning to show it's age.

 

[Alex]

Just use decimals.

Yep. That's the answer. She's a 4.3. Would not bang.

Adding a decimal is essentially marking out of 100. Why don't we just do that?

 

[Alex]

Now THAT is a bum

 

[Alex]

Are you just ignoring my posts like Moanah? Go read. That said, in all seriousness, she is not THAT hot. Very hot, hotter than most people you see on the street, certainly, but the face is nothing special and can even be considered a negative, the ass is meh and the tits are fake.

Yep. Face and bum let her down big time. Still quite hot though. Great stomach and boobs. And at least her bum isn't saggy.

I'd do get ahead of Upton. She looks much fitter and tighter.

Kelly Brook is damn hot.

Yes.