Predicting Size

[hitemup662]

Ladies,

I’m new to this message board so forgive me if this question has been asked before.

From browsing through older threads I see that a number of female members claim to have the ability to, with a good amount of accuracy, know whether or not a man will be well endowed, before actually seeing his goods. I would like to know what physical features a woman looks at on a man’s body to determine endowment. Fullness of a man’s crotch probably is one factor, but what else?

You input is greatly appreciated. Thanks.

 

[GoneA]

I would like to know what physical features a woman looks at on a man’s body to determine endowment.

i would assume that, in the end, it really doesn't matter seeing as your physical features (barring the sexual organ itself) is no representation of penis size.

 

[Snakebyte]

I'd wonder if any woman could predict my size since I am good at hiding it (sometimes)

 

[Lordpendragon]

I'd wonder if any woman could predict my size since I am good at hiding it (sometimes)

I'm going to guess that you are 5.9 - 140 lbs. and ooh maybe 8 x 5.5 - just a wild guess.

 

[ClaireTalon]

It's got nothing to with physical assets, it's deeper - I guess you must call it instinct. I don't believe in any theories about the size of the cock having anything to do with hand, feet, nose, head, chin, wrists, whatsoever.

 

[B_horribleperson]

if you take a guys height and divideit by the lenght of his arm then multiply by 3.14 subtact the lenght of his foot and correct for the GDP of iceland, you will have the lenght of said penis.

 

[madame_zora]

Skinny. That's all I'm saying.

 

[hungmark]

I like the cut of your giblets there Maam Zora ;-)

 

[sexycobra]

Skinny. That's all I'm saying.

Once again, you're right, madame_zora...

There was a study published by a group of Italian doctors, in which they measured the flaccid and stretched penis size of 3300 young men enrolled for military service, when doing the mandatory medical exam. Since everyone had to pass their medical exams, there was no bias toward bigger guys (as you will see if you conduct a study telling men that you want to measure their dicks - smaller guys will be under-represented). They found that there was a correlation between height and penis length and width (taller guys having bigger dicks on average), and also, interestingly, between body mass index (BMI) and penis length only (guys with lower BMI having longer dicks on average, regardless of their height). The study mentioned that this may have to do with fat deposits in the lower abdomen region (so skinny guys may have more dick to show).

Reference: Ponchietti, R. et al., Penile Length and Circumference: A Study on 3,300 Young Italian Males, European Urology 2001, 39:183-186.

 

[wonderland]

I have never been able to predict size by how the man looked. It would be nice if there was a system but there isn't.

 

[Aplus]

Once again, you're right, madame_zora...

There was a study published by a group of Italian doctors, in which they measured the flaccid and stretched penis size of 3300 young men enrolled for military service, when doing the mandatory medical exam. Since everyone had to pass their medical exams, there was no bias toward bigger guys (as you will see if you conduct a study telling men that you want to measure their dicks - smaller guys will be under-represented). They found that there was a correlation between height and penis length and width (taller guys having bigger dicks on average), and also, interestingly, between body mass index (BMI) and penis length only (guys with lower BMI having longer dicks on average, regardless of their height). The study mentioned that this may have to do with fat deposits in the lower abdomen region (so skinny guys may have more dick to show).

Reference: Ponchietti, R. et al., Penile Length and Circumference: A Study on 3,300 Young Italian Males, European Urology 2001, 39:183-186.

Explain Ron Jeremy then? Just kidding!

I'm sure that is a coincident. I'm pretty sure all/most skinny guys aren't well hung. Of course I'm not Italian, nor do I live in Europe. Many guys have a lower body mass index when they are younger, so it doesn't hold up under scrutiny IMO.

 

[Aplus]

i guess this kinda makes sense. a person with less fat has more dick to show because there is less fat covering his dick. my BMI is 23, hahah i learned from the death clock.

I've heard (from real guys) that the "extra" amounts to usually about an inch or really more like half an inch. I seriously doubt a guy will gain like another 3 inches if he loses the extra weight around his penis.

 

[sexycobra]

I didn't write the study that I was quoting (and I'm not Italian either), so I don't feel like I need to defend it. However, I think there is some confusion as to what is the meaning of a statistical correlation.
I took this simple explanation from the Web :
Correlation is a statistical technique which can show whether and how strongly pairs of variables are related. For example, height and weight are related - taller people tend to be heavier than shorter people. The relationship isn't perfect. People of the same height vary in weight, and you can easily think of two people you know where the shorter one is heavier than the taller one. Nonetheless, the average weight of people 5'5'' is less than the average weight of people 5'6'', and their average weight is less than that of people 5'7'', etc. Correlation can tell you just how much of the variation in peoples' weights is related to their heights.

So, finding a correlation between BMI and penis size only means that, statistically, on average, guys with lower BMI will have longer dicks. It doesn't say that all skinny guys are hung, nor that all guys with a higher BMI have small dicks. Same with taller guys having bigger dicks on average: the correlation only points to a general statistical tendency, it does not say that all tall guys have big dicks and all short guys have smaller dicks. I think everyone knows that this is not true, anyway.

As for the age thing, you are right, all people in this study were young men aged 18 or so. But that doesn't affect the validity of the study: even if people's BMI increases with age, the correlation would still hold.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Then again ... I know a dude who is 6'3" and has a 27" waist. He is all skin and bones. He was forever lamenting the fact that his cock was under 4". I saw it: he wasn't lying.

 

[madame_zora]

Clearly, a correlation is not a rule. I am only talking about my own perception based on my personal experience. Of course, since I like skinny guys, I see more of them naked. I've sure seen plenty of smaller ones as well.

 

[Aplus]

I didn't write the study that I was quoting (and I'm not Italian either), so I don't feel like I need to defend it. However, I think there is some confusion as to what is the meaning of a statistical correlation.
I took this simple explanation from the Web :
Correlation is a statistical technique which can show whether and how strongly pairs of variables are related. For example, height and weight are related - taller people tend to be heavier than shorter people. The relationship isn't perfect. People of the same height vary in weight, and you can easily think of two people you know where the shorter one is heavier than the taller one. Nonetheless, the average weight of people 5'5'' is less than the average weight of people 5'6'', and their average weight is less than that of people 5'7'', etc. Correlation can tell you just how much of the variation in peoples' weights is related to their heights.

So, finding a correlation between BMI and penis size only means that, statistically, on average, guys with lower BMI will have longer dicks. It doesn't say that all skinny guys are hung, nor that all guys with a higher BMI have small dicks. Same with taller guys having bigger dicks on average: the correlation only points to a general statistical tendency, it does not say that all tall guys have big dicks and all short guys have smaller dicks. I think everyone knows that this is not true, anyway.

As for the age thing, you are right, all people in this study were young men aged 18 or so. But that doesn't affect the validity of the study: even if people's BMI increases with age, the correlation would still hold.

Well I don't have much faith in correlations or polls for that matter. Statistics can pretty much be shaped to say or suggest whatever the author wishes. IMO something is either true or it isn't. As a man who firmly believes in science, I try to never confuse fact with fiction. We can agree to disagree. That study suggests a correlation, and I simply see a coincidence. Now it such studies were to show similar results in several other countries, I might tend to see them as proof.

 

[sexycobra]

I see that my posts have generated a few comments...
However, I still feel like I want to clarify a few things about them.

Well I don't have much faith in correlations or polls for that matter. Statistics can pretty much be shaped to say or suggest whatever the author wishes.

This is not a matter of "faith". You can compute a correlation by hand (or you can use Excel or more sophisticated statistical software); you will always get the same result with the same data. It's the same as with 2+2=4, except that the calculations are a little bit more complex. No, statistics, when used properly, cannot be shaped to say or suggest whatever the author wishes. This is simply not true. Sorry.

As a man who firmly believes in science, I try to never confuse fact with fiction.We can agree to disagree. That study suggests a correlation, and I simply see a coincidence.

Once again, I didn't write that study. You are entitled to your opinion. However, I suggest that you actually read the study for yourself (I gave the reference). You will see how they got their measurements, computed the statistics, etc... Definitely no fiction here. By the way, I am a scientist (not that I consider myself smarter because of it, but I may have a different background when approaching such a study).

Then again ... I know a dude who is 6'3" and has a 27" waist. He is all skin and bones. He was forever lamenting the fact that his cock was under 4". I saw it: he wasn't lying.

Clearly, a correlation is not a rule. I am only talking about my own perception based on my personal experience. Of course, since I like skinny guys, I see more of them naked. I've sure seen plenty of smaller ones as well.

A correlation of 1.00 would mean a perfect relationship between two variables (sort of like a rule, to paraphrase madame_zora), a value of 0 means no correlation at all (random), and a value of -1.00 a perfect inverse relationship (also like a rule, but in the other direction)
The statistically significant correlations reported in the study were:
0.208 between height and flaccid penis length
0.156 between height and flaccid penis circumference
-0.238 between BMI and flaccid penis length (negative correlation means lower BMI associated with longer dick, on average)
0.221 between height and stretched penis length
-0.169 between BMI and stretched penis length
(stretched length was also measured because it is normally very close to erect length)

So clearly, these are far from being rules, and you will find plenty of tall, skinny men with short dicks. All you can say, according to the study, is that there is a slightly higher probability that a tall and/or skinny guy will have a bigger dick. That's it. We're not talking about a useful prediction tool here. But, it is still a lot better than urban legends about nose/feet size...

I hope that these clarifications will help.

 

[B_Danceswithlamps]

There was a thread somewhere back that said it was:

"shoe size + 5 then divide by 2"

It was about an inch to half inch off on most people. Some it was exactly right, others it was way off... I don't think that there is any correlation. If it is, it is!

 

[DC_DEEP]

From browsing through older threads I see that a number of female members claim to have the ability to, with a good amount of accuracy, know whether or not a man will be well endowed, before actually seeing his goods. I would like to know what physical features a woman looks at on a man’s body to determine endowment.

Without actually seeing or feeling a man's cock, the only way to accurately predict his size is: spin the dreidl! If it lands on nun, he is tiny. If it lands on heh, he is average. If it lands on gimmel, he is huge. If it lands on shin, it's hanging past his knees and you need to get it inside you to believe it.

 

[Paul Vincent]

Skinny. That's all I'm saying.

I agree. I think they must sacrifice some 'bulk' and build for some cock...Of course not every skinny guy is hung, just a select few

BTW I'm 5'9" (I think, since I saw an old friend who used to be taller than me and now I'm taller than him...he was 5'8" at least last time I saw him, I really need a checkup to get my height etc)

And my BMI is in the ideal/healthy range.