Thunder's Place

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

Size Scatter Plot from TP dataset

12

Data attached this time...

Originally Posted by WrightMan
I have been asked if I would share the data I used for the size scatter plot and the two histograms in this thread. Of course!

Attached is the data. It has three columns of data: Username, Length (BPEL) , girth (EG) - 2320 data points.
(correction: four columns of data: Username, Length (BPEL) , girth (EG), Vol.
The data was gleaned from the much larger TP database of over 13300 datapoints.
To narrow down the data I took only data for users who had entered at least two measurements.
I took their first two measurements and averaged them.

Data attached:


Looks like the data didn’t make it last time…. I’ll try again
Oh! I see the problem… invalid file type. Apparently .CSV the comma delimited data file type is not allowed.
I renamed the file .TXT Rename it .CSV after you download it if you want Excel to load it properly.

Attached Files
PEdata2.txt
(71.1 KB, 37 views)

2008 Starting size: 5.25 BPEL, 5.5 girth, vol. 12.7

2009 Plateau reached 6.5 BPEL, 6.0 girth, vol. 18.6

2012 Resumed PE 6.7 BPEL, 6.0 girth, Vol=19.2 Goal: it's all about the volume: Vol. > 20

I don’t understand the purpose of averaging the first 2 sizes together instead of just taking the most recent data point, which is the closest measurement to the current actual size.


The primary goal of PE should be to make your penis as healthy as possible in both form and function. If you do that, increased size will follow.

Originally Posted by yoshinator
Nice,
so for the people that don’t really care for statistics to much this translates to the following:

the small end of average for this site is:
Length:
5.6
Girth:
4.5
Vol:
9.4
The high end of average for this site is:
Length
7.2
Girth
5.5
Vol
17.4

Can you enlarge the distance between units to make the distance from 1 to 2 and 2 to 3 all the way to 9 larger. I would like to see the distribution a little bit bigger. I think that would also really emphasize the outliers on the graph. I really like this kind of stuff.

I think it’s important to note that this information is coming from this site… not the general populous. It would stand to reason that the men on a PENIS ENLARGEMENT site are larger than the average man.

It’s self selecting and reporting too and that add another two sources of bias.


Thunder's Place: increasing penis size one dick at a time.

Yep … the data has it’s share of bias, and I think that most on this site understand that.

Like most of you, I have done my fair share of snooping around the Internet looking for this information and I don’t think there is any study that has produced more enlightening data on this topic than thunders.

That’s pretty cool


Starting (10 / 2011): 6.50 BPEL, 5.50 MEG

Current: 7.50 BPEL, 6.00 MEG

Goal: 8.50 BPEL 6.50 MEG

Originally Posted by gprent

I don’t understand the purpose of averaging the first 2 sizes together instead of just taking the most recent data point, which is the closest measurement to the current actual size.

I was attempting to get a representation of “normal” penis size i.e. not including the effects of PE. Just to give us a comparison point.

But I didn’t want to take all the data from the TP database because there are several types of bias embedded in the data. There is self-selection bias, and self-measurement bias. I thought that by taking the measurements from guys that bothered to enter multiple data points I could minimize some of this bias. And by taking their first measurements I am getting essentially their starting size.

Now… if you want a graph of what happens after PE, that is a different story. I looked at that in a different thread here: Data on PE gains from TP database


2008 Starting size: 5.25 BPEL, 5.5 girth, vol. 12.7

2009 Plateau reached 6.5 BPEL, 6.0 girth, vol. 18.6

2012 Resumed PE 6.7 BPEL, 6.0 girth, Vol=19.2 Goal: it's all about the volume: Vol. > 20

The penis is very hard to measure, but I have confidence this grouping is not all that far off. In this regard, we can use a shooting target as an analogy where a bulls eye represents measurement success-

• Accuracy is how close to the bulls eye the data point cloud is regardless of how scattered out the various points are. The point cloud could be scattered all over the target face but it would still be considered “accurate” because the cloud is centered on the bulls eye.

• Precision is the not so much how close to the bulls eye the cloud lies, is but how tight the grouping is. You may have a precise grouping located far from the bulls eye.

More data points is better, got lots of them here, but precision and accuracy are notoriously hard to get measuring an organ that can be measured in any of variety of erect conditions and from a variety of locations. Measuring my own penis I can make it anywhere form 7-8 inches depending on the method and technique. The girth is probably the more accurate data in this set, if simply because it is harder to screw that measurement up.

Are the length figures BP or NBP?

Looks great! I believe though the numbers is a little exaggerated from Thunders place, but that’s just my guess.

Top
12

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:52 AM.