Thunder's Place

The big penis and mens' sexual health source, increasing penis size around the world.

Height vs. Length vs. Girth Project

Originally Posted by jlichtenberg
Your welcome. Maybe you could explain a little about what the chi squared graphs from Para-Goomba actually mean. Never really got into that, but it is never to late to learn.

I am a little rusty on it and that is why I am unable to do the calculations myself, but from memory, it will tell us what percent of the quantity can be attributed to a variable. So, for example. If Length and height yielded 0.50, then that would mean that 50% of your penis length would be determined by height. It is an important calculation, as one can see that the graphs are upward sloping. But does that really mean anything if we find that 0.05 is the coefficient? In other words, if only 5% of the penis length is determined by height.

I am hoping someone with a better grasp of the concept could help.

Gimli


Start: May 12, 2007 BPEL: 5.551" EG: 4.646" FL: 3.051" FG: 3.858" Please Fill Out My Survey: Click Me!

Now: July 13, 2007 BPEL: 6.250" EG: 5.500" FL: 3.346" FG: 4.488"

Goal: BPEL: 7.000" EG: 6.000" FL: 5.000" FG: 4.750"

Gimli,

What you’re thinking of is R-squared (or the coefficient of determination). All you have to do is square the correlation coefficients you already had calculated. Jlichtenberg’s graphs show these values: for example, ~16% of variation in penis length can be accounted for by height (or vice versa) in our sample of data.

All three correlations (height-length, height-girth, length-girth) are significant at the 0.01 level, so we can be quite certain that there really are positive correlations among these variables. The actual strength of the correlations can be seen graphically in the scatterplots that Jlichtenberg posted. Knowing an individual’s height, as you can see, gives you little help in guessing his dick length or girth, but over a large population the correlations are definitely there.

At only 68” I hate all tall people now,lol

Originally Posted by Para-Goomba
Gimli,

What you’re thinking of is R-squared (or the coefficient of determination). All you have to do is square the correlation coefficients you already had calculated. Jlichtenberg’s graphs show these values: for example, ~16% of variation in penis length can be accounted for by height (or vice versa) in our sample of data.

All three correlations (height-length, height-girth, length-girth) are significant at the 0.01 level, so we can be quite certain that there really are positive correlations among these variables. The actual strength of the correlations can be seen graphically in the scatterplots that Jlichtenberg posted. Knowing an individual’s height, as you can see, gives you little help in guessing his dick length or girth, but over a large population the correlations are definitely there.

Exactly. I wrote the R2 value in with the graphs to show that the relationship between both height-lenght and heigth-girth are really low.
And furthermore, if we assume R2 to be 100%, it would still be almost nothing. You only gain 0.048 inches more girth per inch you are higher. That means that if you are 5 inches higher, you dick would only be 0.24 inches bigger (girth). And knowing from my own experience, that is about the uncertainty there is on measuring the girth of my dick (due to temperature, excitement, lag time from jelqing, exactly where I measure on the middle, etc). So even if this graph was a 100 % true, it doesn’t help us much. And as you know - it’s not.

Correct me, if I am wrong.

J

Originally Posted by MiracleGrow
At only 68” I hate all tall people now,lol

Dude, look at the graphs again. Look at the girth graphs. People at 66 have the same max as people at 76 and 77. So don’t hate them

(Gimli, we need a bigger sample size. Keep collecting data)

J

Originally Posted by jlichtenberg
Just made the graphs (always do graphics before calculation) for girth and lengh in relation to height.

It seems like the correlation is really low for girth and really low but a little higher for length…

Length to girth correlation was omitted. It’s the strongest correlation from amongst what has been examined so far.

The slope lines don’t look as weak to me as you seem to be stating. It appears to me that girth’s correlation to height is a byproduct of the other correlations.


Last edited by beenthere : 07-27-2007 at .

Originally Posted by jlichtenberg
Dude, look at the graphs again. Look at the girth graphs. People at 66 have the same max as people at 76 and 77. So don’t hate them

(Gimli, we need a bigger sample size. Keep collecting data)

J

It appears to me that you are concentrating on the weakest correlation (which seems to me to be a byproduct), and on top of that only looking at the upper part of the chart and not the entire chart. It’s not objective posts. Will a bigger sample size really mean anything to you? Though it may seem so, I’m not picking on you personally, as predisposed bias in viewpoints/opinions henders all of us. It’s just that your posts are showing the signs very obviously when reading the data.


Last edited by beenthere : 07-27-2007 at .

Originally Posted by jlichtenberg
Exactly. I wrote the R2 value in with the graphs to show that the relationship between both height-lenght and heigth-girth are really low.
And furthermore, if we assume R2 to be 100%, it would still be almost nothing. You only gain 0.048 inches more girth per inch you are higher. That means that if you are 5 inches higher, you dick would only be 0.24 inches bigger (girth). And knowing from my own experience, that is about the uncertainty there is on measuring the girth of my dick (due to temperature, excitement, lag time from jelqing, exactly where I measure on the middle, etc). So even if this graph was a 100 % true, it doesn’t help us much. And as you know - it’s not.

Correct me, if I am wrong.

J

In averages that is.

Here’s a chart breakdown (at the 1000 vote mark) from the height vs weenie poll at Thunder’s. As can be seen, when the penis size vs height is looked at from this perspective, taller guys have a higher percentage rate of longer penises and a lower percentage rate of shorter penises. On average though, the difference was only about 1/4” (last time I had examined it, which was at the 790 vote mark from short to tall). Averages don’t really do much towards telling us the odds a woman has of meeting particular sizes on an individual basis. The chart below does (well perhaps not exactly, as I believe sizesurvey’s chart of penis size vs confidence is a factor and bound to be accurate at least to some degree).

1000 votes

—————-<4.99”——————5-5.99”——————-6-6.99”———————7”>

<5’9”————4%———————-24%————————44%———————-28%———-365 votes

5’10”-6’1”——3%———————-21%————————42%———————-34%———-441 votes

6’2”>————2%———————-16%————————40%———————-42%———-194 votes

<5’9”————13 votes————— 88 v—————————162 v———————-102 v

5’10”-6’1”——14 v——————— 93 v—————————186 v———————-148 v

6’2”>————-3 v———————-31 v—————————-78 v————————82 v

This thread of Gimli’s seems to be more about looking into the relationship between height, length and girth, and not so much into the practical application. That’s fine and I like it, but it needs to be realised.


Last edited by beenthere : 07-27-2007 at .

Height: 72.5 inches

PrePE BPEL: 6.3 inches

PrePE EG: 4.75 inches


Start: 1. June- 15cm NBP x 12cm EG / 1. August- 16.5cm NBP x 12.3cm EG

Goal: 18,5cm NBP x 14cm EG

Originally Posted by Phyriel

Guys anyone experienced on this?? Tall and tiny woman’s, any pussy correlation?

From my experience, the tiny girls I’ve fingered or fucked always have a tight ass pussy. Hell sometimes I haven’t even been able to get it in and I’ve got a whopping 4.5 EG.


In search of a perfect body, penis, and girl.

The search NO longer continues. :)

How about including shoe size/width in your calculations also?

I’ll do my part..

Height: 68 inches
Pre PE BPEL: 6 inches
Pre PE EG: 4.5 inches

Height: 72”

Pre Pe Length: 7”

Pre Pe girth: 5.5”

Height: 66”

Pre PE Length: 6.25”

Pre PE Girth: 4.5”


CU,

Cod

Starting: 6.25 BPEL x 4.5 EG. Upon finding Thunder's: 7 BPEL x 5 EG. 2006: 7.25 BPEL x 5.25 EG BPFS: 7.75. As of Oct. 10, 2007: 7 1/2 BPEL x 5 1/2 EG BPFS: 8 in.

Height: 69”

Pre PE BPEL: 5.5”

Pre PE EG: 4.75”


11 JULY 2007 - BPEL: 5.5" EG: 4.75" NBPEL: 4.5"

11 JUNE 2008 - BPEL: 6.75" EG: 5.0" Base EG: 5.5"

KingPole is my Sensei - Goal: Just a little bit more - Progress/Routine - My Pictures - Perfect Measuring Technique

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:59 AM.