Thunder's Place

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

Average Gains and Starting Measurements

Average Gains and Starting Measurements

Girth Gain Distribution

I have decided to run through the data gathered here at Thunder’s Place to see just what can be expected from our hard earned science experiments here. Many members ask for estimates of what they can expect to gain. My goal was to crunch the data and see just what these numbers may be. Additionally, I went through the numbers to find the average starting statistics here at Thunder’s Place, just to see how they stacked up against the studies done around the world.

First let’s begin with the assumptions I made in order to cut down the false statistics found here on the website.

ASSUMPTIONS MADE:

  • Length Statistics over 11 inches were discarded as this size is an extreme outlier
  • Girth Statistics over 8.5 inches were discarded for the same reason
  • Length Statistics under 2 inches were discarded
  • Girth Statistics under 2 inches were discarded
  • Length Gains of over 4 inches were discarded as there has not been anyone here who has documented such an extraordinary gain
  • Girth Gains of over 3 inches were discarded for the same reason
  • Length Decreases over 1 inch were discarded due to the likelihood that these are false statistics
  • Girth Decreases over 1 inch were discarded for the same reason
  • Members who created a single entry were discarded when calculating gains and rates of gains, but were included in the starting statistics

I can assure each of you that those statistics that fall above and below the assumptions made above are a very small portion of the overall sample size, and can be assumed to have a negligible effect on the resulting statistics after their removal.

Statistics were calculated for two groups. A group of only gainers, and a group that contained everyone within the reasonable range of statistics. In addition to these two groups, statistics for inches and centimeters are provided.

Resulting Statistics can be found below:

STARTING STATS:
Average Starting Length: 6.3582 in - 16.1499 cm
Standard Deviation: 0.8203 in - 2.0836 cm
Average Starting Girth: 5.0179 in - 12.7455 cm
Standard Deviation: 0.5427 in - 1.3786 cm

Starting Statistics in Inches

Starting Statistics in Centimetres

The first thing that stands out to me when examining the data, is the clear tendency towards rounding to the nearest quarter/half/whole inch that comes with self-reported statistics. The tendency to round can mess with the accuracy of statistics, but it is assumed here that the rounding is reasonable and not excessive. The same quarter/half/whole inch grid can be seen on the centimeter graph as well. The scatter plots also indicate that the vast majority of users fall between 5 and 7 inches starting length (approx. 13.5 to 18.5 centimeters) and between 4.5 and 5.5 inches of girth (approx. 11.5 to 14 cm). The is confirmed by the averages listed above. Additionally, below the distribution of starting statistics can be seen in an easier to read format. The X axes of each graph are in the units listed in the graph title, while the Y axes are number of users falling into each category.

Starting Statistic Distribution

GAINS STATS:
Average Overall Length Gain: 0.6384 in - 1.6216 cm
Standard Deviation: 0.5367 in - 1.3632 cm
Average Overall Girth Gain: 0.2854 in - 0.7248 cm
Standard Deviation: 0.3509 in - 0.8914 cm

Average Length Gain of Gainers: 0.7350 in - 1.8670 cm
Standard Deviation: 0.5234 in - 1.3296 cm
Average Girth Gain of Gainers: 0.4057 in - 1.0305 cm
Standard Deviation: 0.3333 in - 0.8465 cm

Gain Statistics in Inches

Gain Statistics in Centimetres

The above two graphs show the distribution of length and girth gains for all members who fell within the reasonable statistics range. As is quite apparent, the majority of gains occurred between 0 and 1 inch of BP Length (approx. 0 and 2.5 cm) and between 0 and 0.5 inches of Mid Shaft Girth (approx. 0 and 1 cm). We can again see the tendency to round gains towards the nearest quarter/half/whole inch amongst users, as again the gains statistics line up nicely along the grid lines. We can see the distribution of the gains statistics appears in the shape of a comet, with the majority of data point appearing close to the origin at 0 gains in either dimension, and the data points becoming more sparse as they move away from the origin, especially in the positive direction of both axes.
Something to notice about those who lost size in a penis dimension: these users are in the minority of the statistics by a wide margin. Additionally, no member reported losing both length and girth, and those that lost in one dimension commonly gained in the other dimension. Below the distribution of gains can be seen. These distributions show the distribution of those who gained, and does not include the small portion of users who reported negative gains.

Gain Distribution

GAIN PERCENTAGES:
Percentage of Users who Gained Length: 89.60%
Percentage of Users who Gained Girth: 77.12%

Now what do all of these numbers mean? The standard deviation of each average presented above show how likely an individual is to deviate from the statistical average. The way the standard deviation works is as such: 68% of users were within 1 standard deviation of the indicated measurement, 95% of them were within 2 standard deviations, and 99.7% of them were within 3 standard deviations of the average.
We can also see that when including decreases in size between first and last measurements, the standard deviation for gains is greater than the average gain. This means that Thunder’s Place gain statistics are highly erratic, ie. they vary greatly. However, when considering only those who experienced gains, the standard deviations, as expected, fall below the value of the average gain. Despite this, they still remain a significant percentage of the average gain, indicating a flatter bell curve distribution of gains. This means that while a good portion of users can expect gains near that average number, the gains of each user will obviously vary widely from individual to individual.

What about the effect your starting size has on your ability to gain? Below are four graphs that show the distribution between a starting dimension of each member, and the gains experienced by that member in the corresponding dimension. This was done in both inches and centimeters, as usual.

Length Gain against Initial Length in Inches
Girth Gain against Initial Girth in Inches
Length Gain against Initial Length in Centimetres
Girth Gain against Initial Girth in Centimetres

The above four graphs reveal some interesting trends of growth here at Thunder’s Place. Commonly it is thought that a smaller starting size allows for greater gains, and this can be seen easily on the length graphs. These graphs exhibit a clearly triangular shape, indicating that greater gains were experienced by those who started on the lower end of sizes. As one moves rightward across the x-axis of starting size, it can be seen that the BPEL length gains drop off. However, a different trend is seen in the girth department. The decreasing triangle clearly seen in the length graphs is much less visible in the girth graphs. In fact, these girth graphs exhibit a much flatter shape overall. For the most part it appears that no matter the starting size, a 0.5 inch gain in girth (approx. 1.3 centimeters) is reasonable for members. There is a small trend towards smaller starting girths experiencing greater girth gains, but it is much less apparent than in the length gain graphs.

A positive result of the study reveals that a very high proportion of the users here at Thunder’s Place report positive gains. I think we may be onto something here at Thunder’s :shrug:

Summaries of the averages of starting stats, gain stats, and percentage of users who gained can all be found below in easier to read tables as attachments.

Hopefully you all find this helpful!

-Statistics Compiled on the 25th of February, 2016-

Attached Images
InchesStartStats.png
(5.4 KB, 358 views)
CentimetersStartStats.png
(5.7 KB, 228 views)
InchesGainStats.png
(7.2 KB, 340 views)
CentimetersGainStats.png
(7.5 KB, 245 views)
UserGainStats.png
(7.0 KB, 261 views)

Best of luck to all fellow PE-ers in their journey.


Last edited by memento : 03-06-2016 at . Reason: More inline images

is the average starting length BP or NBP?

The average starting length is BP. At least it should be, as that is the way that the database asks user to input their measurements. The average starting girth is MEG, as that is the way that the database asks members to input their measurements. All measurements for length are assumed to be BPEL, and all measurements for girth are assumed to be MEG. This includes gains.


Best of luck to all fellow PE-ers in their journey.

Interesting…so crunching some simple numbers, anyone who is 8”x6” is essentially at the 2 standard deviations mark, which i think means bigger than 95% of the population. If they are 8.8”x6.6” then they are bigger than 99%. If they are 7.2”x5.6” then they are bigger than 68%.

Also, the Thunders numbers are much much higher than that of actual scientific studies, so chances are ours might either be biased or slightly inflated. That said, if anyone falls into the above ranges, then they could be sure that they are “at least” bigger than 68% and/or 95% and/or 99% essentially.


Current: BPEL 7.9"/NBPEL 6.75" MEG 5.2", BPFL 6.5"/NBPFL 5.5" FG 4.4"

---

Realistic Goal: BPEL 8.5"/NBPEL 7.5" EG 5.5" | Optimistic: BPEL 9"/NBPEL 8" MEG 5.75" | Dream: BPEL 10"/NBPEL 9" MEG 6.5"


Last edited by Phoenix7672 : 02-28-2016 at .

Great work! Thanks for putting the time in. :)


Starting Stats: BPEL 7.0¨ x MEG 5.3¨ (4th Nov 2015)

Current Stats: BPEL 7.7¨ x MEG 5.6¨ (4th April 2017)

The Dream: BPEL 8.1¨ x EG 6.1¨ (Not sure if the wife supports ¨the dream¨)

Good job.


Start 6.8” x 4.7” (4.9" BEG)

Now 7.5” x 4.9” (5.1" BEG)

Regras do Fórum

Thanks, that’s a lot of work. Did you record how long it took to make those gains? What’s the average rate of gain? Presumably it starts high and gradually slows down?

Originally Posted by Phoenix7672

Also, the Thunders numbers are much much higher than that of actual scientific studies, so chances are ours might either be biased or slightly inflated.


I’m sure we push the ruler harder in than a Dr or nurse would push it in a subject, round up more, and that a few on here inflate their sizes for the internet, making the numbers higher.
But I would think we should add a bit to the sizes published in studies when comparing to our numbers, at least when talking about bone- pressed measurements.

Originally Posted by Phoenix7672
Also, the Thunders numbers are much much higher than that of actual scientific studies, so chances are ours might either be biased or slightly inflated. That said, if anyone falls into the above ranges, then they could be sure that they are “at least” bigger than 68% and/or 95% and/or 99% essentially.

Unfortunately here on Thunder’s we must rely on self-reporting. This means rounding, lying, and inaccurate measurements. The rounding is extremely visible on the scatter plots, but there isn’t anything that can be done about it. These three drawbacks of self reporting skew our stats here.

Originally Posted by JohnnyClang
Thanks, that’s a lot of work. Did you record how long it took to make those gains? What’s the average rate of gain? Presumably it starts high and gradually slows down?

I did not record how long it took to record the gains for each member. But it can be assumed like you said to have a decreasing pay out over time. The greatest rate of gain will always be in the earlier phases if PE is done properly. Additionally, the rate of gains from statistics overall can be quite meaningless for some members. This is because many members will take time off from PE for extended periods of time, years even, then return and make more gains. Including the break time as part of the time it took to reach their final size would skew the statistics. But, not including it would also create inaccuracy, at least that is what many here at Thunder’s would believe. It is often recommended to take breaks when gains are extremely hard to come by despite increasing exercise intensity and duration. The penis tends to toughen up when putting it through these stresses, and thus taking time off can allow the tissue to soften up over time, creating opportunity for gains in the future.

In short, the time between initial and final measurements can vary greatly depending on dedication and length of breaks, if any, and creating a scale of average rate of gain, and time between initial and final measurements would be largely meaningless.

Originally Posted by hardhalfyard
I’m sure we push the ruler harder in than a Dr or nurse would push it in a subject, round up more, and that a few on here inflate their sizes for the internet, making the numbers higher.
But I would think we should add a bit to the sizes published in studies when comparing to our numbers, at least when talking about bone- pressed measurements.

I would also agree with hardhalfyard. We most certainly press harder than a doctor would. Either for our own ego, or our own satisfaction at progress. However, I would assume that this increase in pressing would result in a slight increase in length, nothing crazy noticeable. I would also assume that the people taking these measurements would make a good effort to ensure they are measuring as close to the pubic bone as possible.


Best of luck to all fellow PE-ers in their journey.

As a scientist and a long time PEer I am very very happy and impressed with this.

Speaking of gains, you have definitely gained legend status around here man great job :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) ):

Originally Posted by Ireland8x6
As a scientist and a long time PEer I am very very happy and impressed with this.

Speaking of gains, you have definitely gained legend status around here man great job :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) ):

Well I’m glad I could provide this info for you, from one scientist to another :)


Best of luck to all fellow PE-ers in their journey.

Originally Posted by hardhalfyard
I’m sure we push the ruler harder in than a Dr or nurse would push it in a subject, round up more, and that a few on here inflate their sizes for the internet, making the numbers higher.
But I would think we should add a bit to the sizes published in studies when comparing to our numbers, at least when talking about bone- pressed measurements.

There are very few studies that are not self reported.I found two studies where measurements were tracked by a urologist. Every single study, including the most publicized, are all self reported.

You will never EVER get real measurements from self reported. Ever.

The whole “average penis size” is stupid and meaning less because I guarantee you 99% of men lie or are mistaken about penis size. It’s like self reported bench press. Usually 50-75% lower than what people claim.


This account is another iteration of the previously banned deadwood187 (see his previous end). He delights in trolling this board for some reason.

The Lifestyles survey from Cancun was measured bone pressed by nurses I think, and there was a study of 15000 Italian soldiers done measured by doctors or nurses, this was stretched flaccid measurement, again, I’m sure they didn’t stretch as hard as we would, offhand those are the only surveys I know of that weren’t self measured, there are probably more though.

Originally Posted by sven217
There are very few studies that are not self reported. I found two studies where measurements were tracked by a urologist. Every single study, including the most publicized, are all self reported.

You will never EVER get real measurements from self reported. Ever.

The whole “average penis size” is stupid and meaning less because I guarantee you 99% of men lie or are mistaken about penis size. It’s like self reported bench press. Usually 50-75% lower than what people claim.

We all know the cold hard truth though.

For me, PE has been a life saver, and as such invaluable no matter what the gains physically.

I will say that my stats are accurate to the best of my ability and we have to be circumspect regarding the claims of others.

I have spent months at a time sharing with members here as they begin and get results and so I know the reasonable claims of some here are valid.

I have a friend who claims he knows this is all bullshit, but he’s your typical naysayer and probably suffers with less dick than he would like, so maybe he has snuck in here and has begun on the road to salvation.haha!


Began December 2009 at 5 7/8" length and 5" girth.

As of December 5th 2012 7 3/8" BPEL and 6 1/8" base girth.

Going for the magic 8"x6"

Top
Similar Threads 
ThreadStarterForumRepliesLast Post
Starting with well below average girth.BillyIdolPenis Enlargement Basics10906-01-2013 02:36 AM
Hanging Guidelines / Personal & Average Maximum Gain-rate (PMGR & AMGR)Mr. FPenis Hangers1208-03-2010 05:50 AM
Starting base girth vs. length gainshopeful2hanglowPenis Enlargement Basics212-03-2008 05:41 AM

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:10 PM.