Thunder's Place

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

Penis Size: The True Average

Originally Posted by BeardedDragon
Because over half of TP members reported starting sizes would be in the top 5%. Even adjusting the TP data down by 0.375” to account for self-reporting bias, would still have over half of TP members starting size in the top 10%. If the review’s results were NBP, it would resolve this large discrepancy between the two distributions.


Self reported bias measures about half inch, comparing them with not-self reported. So let’s say the real average is 13 cm, add half inch and I think that’s enough to screw everything, although I haven’t done the calculations. But people self-reporting are probably also pushing stronger against theirs fat pad.

Originally Posted by BeardedDragon
……
I lived most of my life with a 5.5” BPEL and got no indication it was above average, from sexual partners, or from locker room observations. I now have 6.6” BPEL, and I also have no experiences that make me think this is in the top 3-4% of length.


Locker room looks at flaccid lenght not BPEL? I think 6.6 BPEL isn’t far the size of most porn actors. Some of them despaced as ‘monster cocks’ are actually even smaller probably.

I am not saying the study is 100% correct though. But I remember at lest two studies, one on NIgerian males and the other on Italian males, which gave the same average or slightly lower. Have you seen their sources BD?

As marinera just said about pushing into fat pad. I push in almost to the point of pain. I would bet money that isn’t happening in the majority of studies.


12/11/2013 BPEL 5 3/4 NBPEL 5 1/16 BPFSL 6 1/16 NBPFSL 5, EG Base 5 EG Mid 4 7/8 EG Below Glans 4 3/4

11/02/15 BPEL 7 1/8”, BPFSL 8 1/16”, EG Mid 5 1/4 —- Goals BPEL 7 1/2”, NBPEL 6 1/2", BPFSL 9” Motivational Resources Wanted

8/9/2014 259 lbs ---- 11/2/15 248 lbs 33.2% body fat Bhcentral's Progress Reports and Pictures

I agree, self-report is pushing all the way into fat pad, and also taking the best measurement out of multiple attempts at maximum arousal. Even if I subtract 0.5” from my self-reported size down to 6.1” BPEL, this review is still saying I’m in the top 7% of length.

My experience just doesn’t match that. Maybe my perception is warped from all the time at Thunder’s, but I think this review is a particularly low estimate of the ‘true normal’ size distribution.


Before 5.5" x 4.1" volume 7.3 ci ////// Now 7.4" x 4.9" volume 14.1 ci

The definitions are quiet clear on what qualified to be taken into the study.
Its rather reliable in BPFSL as it has more numbers and less margin for error.

original study:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/…/bju.13010/full
It doesnt look like its made up to reassure men as the individual studies arent correlated to such an agenda.

I think the thing that creates so much confussion with the numbers and what appears to be is mathematicly the mean and how penis size is distributed.

The standard deviation is 1.6cm/0.6in for the BPEL of 13.12cm/5.2inches.
1.9cm/0.75in for the BPFSL of 13.24cm/5,2in .

This means a 5.8 in could still be considered “average”. As would a 4.6 penis. Statisticly.

Its a bell curve distribution. Few very small and few very big.
There also seems to be more room for the few bigger dicks in the distribution.
More big dicks then micro penis so to say. It can get up to 9 inches but hardly below 2 let alone below zero…

So there is a huge amount of dick within the average +/- 0.6 inches.
A bell curve. Which means there arent the biggest amount of people with the exact number 5.2 BPEL but most are distributed around the sd range which then ends up with 5.2 total average.
Below and above the standard deviation there is a drop in the numbers of possiblities ( the bell narrowing out). !!!

This is why you wouldnt necessarly get a a comment of beeing above average when you are around 6 BPEL unless the woman is a certified penis measurer. ehehehe :D
Nor would you be considered below average with a 4.6 dick.
A woman who had 70 men from the “bottom average” of 4.6 distributed to her pussy would notice one “top average” of 5.8 and she probably would labell a 6 inch dick big.
But chances are she will get a wide range of the standard deviation mean which with fatpad and other variables wont necessarily make a above statistical average penis look above average.

So beeing in the top 7% isnt per se synonymous with the difference in beeing in the top 7% financially in comparison or in eye size which is a narrower standard deviation.

Its funny how we think about such small margins. For example in bodybuilding the margins are much bigger and thus you can easier label someone as big or small. Or sports were time is measured where a second can get you easily into the 1%.

Penis focused things warp our minds and understanding. In the PE world that is largely based on insecurities you get even more big dicks to show off then small dicks.

Many people dont care about penis bigger or smaller cause most humans are average size anyway.
Its only through stuff like porn that makes every dick look double the size that we cant believe 5.2 is average.
Also the selection bias of remembering one huge dick more then all the average dicks.

Dont know if this is now motivating or demotivating lol.


Last edited by dickerschwanz : 03-03-2015 at .

There a number of studies that don’t add up though. Two studies on Turkey, one average stretched length = 9 cm, the other one average stretched length = 14 cm : a difference of over 50%. One study found the average stretched length = 16.74. It is a difference of 4.55 cm (near two inches) with the overall average. I don’t think it is methodologically correct add up studies with so big difference in findings, one of the two has to be wrong in a way or another.

Originally Posted by marinera
There a number of studies that don’t add up though. Two studies on Turkey, one average stretched length = 9 cm, the other one average stretched length = 14 cm : a difference of over 50%. One study found the average stretched length = 16.74. It is a difference of 4.55 cm (near two inches) with the overall average. I don’t think it is methodologically correct add up studies with so big difference in findings, one of the two has to be wrong in a way or another.


Thats why the standard deviation in comparison to the distribution curve is so important statisticly to make sense of the numbers.
They are both not that far away from the standard deviation.

If one says the average penis is about 4.6 - to 5.8 long it would give a good impression on whats going on instead of calling a specific number.

But if the average is in the 9-17 range doesn’t make any sense to me. We know pretty much as before : ‘What’s the average?’ - ‘Keep guessing’.

‘…Bondil reported the longest penile length in the flaccid and stretched states, and though this might be a normal variation, measurements were obtained only after three manual stretches of the penis…..’.
http://www.nature.com/ijir/journal/…l/3901272a.html

You can’t add numbers obtained this way with the others.

Similarly:

‘Bondil et al.10 reported the longest penile length in the flaccid (10.7 cm) and stretched conditions (16.24 cm). In their study, measurements were obtained after three manual stretches of the penis. Owing to the methodological difference in determining stretched length, it cannot be compared with the present study.’

http://www.nature.com/ijir/journal/…l/3901569a.html

Another one found an average stretched length of 17.5 cm? In men undergoing radical prostathectomy? :wtf:

A very good friend of mine who works “in the industry” spoke about penis size last weekend after I directly asked her.

She would see somewhere between 30 to 75 men a week on average and has been working there for over 3 years.

After a black basketball player who she describes as painful, I would be the next largest she has ever had. She has

no reason to lie about it despite my thinking she is..

One caveat that she did add, she has seen longer though not by a lot, it’s the combination of thickness and length

that apparently sets me apart.

The average simply isn’t “average” as far as we here at Thunders think.


Was - NBPEL 6.5" BPEL 7.5" MSEG 5.5" Now - NPBEL 8.1" BPEL 8.7" MSEG 6.3"

Originally Posted by marinera
But if the average is in the 9-17 range doesn’t make any sense to me. We know pretty much as before : ‘What’s the average?’ - ‘Keep guessing’.

The thing is that it is impossible to pinpoint. lol
There are actually many averages statisticly.

The easy one is counting all numbers dividing it by the number of participants. In this study ends up with 5.2 inches.
In any study where you get some bigger ones and maybe one huge one you will get unrealisitic numbers that dont fit the reality. Espacially with toal low numbers.
Its like checking the average income out of 10 000 people and one of them is a billionaire.

Only with the standard deviation and the distribution you get the realistic picture.
90% of people fall between 4.6 and 5.8 inches BPEL. Anything outside of that isnt occurying much often.

Realisticly a 4.8 penis is as average as an 5.6 penis and its impossible to pinpoint a number in that context.
___
oz, I made the same observations with a pro. One bigger then 8 inches in probably 20 years fucking around the globe. + Amteur gangbangs and nude beaches show approx. the numbers presented here.

Lol, there is no way this study is BPEL. A BPEL of 5.2 inches, on average, is about 4.5 inches NBPEL. So, in other words, this study found that the average NBPEL is 4.5 inches.? Plus, if it was BPEL, the graph wouldn’t make any sense at all. I mean 5.5 inches BPEL is 70th percentile, and 5.9 inches BPEL is about 90th percentile. This has to be a joke. Even if this were NBPEL, it wouldn’t make sense. I mean, a NBPEL of 5.9 inches is in the 90th percentile.? I’m exactly 5.9 inches NBPEL, and I was having a hard time accepting that I am merely ‘average’, and today I find out I’m way above average (90th percentile)- but that is considering the study is NBPEL. Heck, if it’s BPEL, like it’s said to be, then my BPEL of 6.3-6.5 inches is WAAAY above the stated average of 5.2 inches- 95th percentile according to the graph. So, I’m 90th percentile if this study is NBPEL, and 95th percentile if this study is BPEL. This has gotta be a joke.

I’m so confused.

Dicker, I think I know what is sd, thanks. 90% of people falls in that range only if you believe that those studies can be added, that’s the problem. I think they are putting in the basket x aoranges and y apples, then come out with ‘there are x+y oranges in the basket’, if my example is clear.

It is not a good study IMHO.

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:17 PM.