Well, like any model, the accuracy of it's output is dependent on the quality of the data that is input. If people want accurate results, they need to do a test that will give them an accurate figure.
@@edheldude genius isn't mutually exclusive, you can still have autism, asbergers, and adhd with a genius iq, preventing you from achieving what you internally know you can accomplish. Being a genius masks the the conditions to the point where everyone thinks your just wasting potential and don't have a work ethic.
I was going to give my face a 4.5, but rounded down to 4 just so I didn't need a calculator for that part. There should probably be a 2pt penalty at the end for making choices like that :)
As one of the 14% high IQ subscribers, I need to highlight a fundamental flaw in your math. The final mean does not have the same percentile distribution as the input factors. In more mathematical terms, "the variance of an average is not the average of the variances". Here is the actual percentile chart for the final rating, for those who actually did the calculation: 8: 4.1 7: 3.7 6: 3.5 5: 3.2 4: 2.9 3: 2.7 2: 2.2 1: 1.8 I didn't bother to take into account the race/location at the end. Also, I assumed that input factors are not correlated, which is likely not the case. I didn't expect the numbers to be this low, but it makes sense: being an 8 on your scale requires being an 8 on all factors, each of which has a chance of 1%. That's a statistical impossibility. Throw in the geometric mean thing and I think it makes sense for the number to be very low.
Yes, I noticed the final number was a bit off. That is ok though, the real value for me was having an objective rating and seeing how it was weighted (IE face is important than P size) and what I could aim for in order to improve my individual "ratings". The final number, I could take or leave.
Hey, I know it's been a while, but are you saying that people with a calculated SMV of 4.1 are in the top 1%? Just making sure I'm interpreting you correctly
I think there are some small issues with your system: 1. Your ethnicity and location adjustments implies that Asian/Indian in non-college west can NEVER exceed 6, which means they can never break into the top 10%. I think this due to ethnicity adjustment improperly affecting all factors (for example, if I am a millionaire, my ethnicity won’t change its actual value), thus I think you should move ethnicity to be an adjustment for maybe just face (which is still a big factor). Location adjustment also implies that NO ONE in the non-college west can ever exceed 7.5, but you can have say a perfect 8 white male in SEA in college be a 10 out of a possible 8? In addition, rich mf on online dating apps completely negate all location adjustments because they can simply fly their women to their location. Thus I think location should be re-thought out for this system. 2. Factors that are difficult for women to measure publicly (p-length and IQ) shouldn’t be on this system. This system measures SMV. Unless you put your P-length (you weirdo) or IQ on your tinder profile or you walk around with that info on a badge, this will only be known after the fact and thus wouldn’t impact SMV. 3. I think your money weighting is too low. A lot of women are willing to leave a poor Chad making minimum wage for a rich, short, ugly mf. Since money is one of the few factors that can partially compensate enough to allow for a rich butt a$$ ugly guy to poach a poor Chad’s girl, it’s weighting should at least partially reflect that possibility. Overall a good idea, the adjustments above are just small improvements for an overall solid system.
As a black guy living in west for the past six years, I learned that ,average white guy has way better advantage that avarage non white guy on dating market. When it comes to Asian guy there is the common "small dick "stereotypes . How ever i don't get it why an Indian guy has to subtract from there SMV because of race? To be honest i fill like 90% of white girs are not open to date black guy.
@@wukirmaskal7419 as a black guy born in london i have to strongly disagree. I dont struggle to attract women at all. I have a south asian friend that thinks women prefer black guys because of how well i do with women. In reality he has no social skills and smell horribly all the time. What im saying is its likely your lacking in other areas and are misinterpreting it as a race. Even wheat only gave white guys a .5 plus.
@@pullupenyojer I think the tricky piece is that the weighting for money can’t be static for everyone. I think depending on how ugly, out of shape, etc. you are, the lower the weighting because If you are trying to use money to compensate for your weaker areas, then it should be related to how much the woman feels repulsed/disgusted/unimpressed/etc. by you due to how much variance there is between you and her ideal man.
@@santiagocandela354 I didn't had problem of attracting even 8s and 9s when i was in my country. All of a sudden every thing is changed when i come to Europe. I expected the same results with girls but the situation is shocking for me. I believe games are mostly international. There is of course a culture difference, however I'm smart enough to understand it. I even joined university in the west and I'm average in look and height. I used to date above average girls (you might know how beautiful are Ethiopian girls ) . When i struggled to date a 3 / 10 white girls, I interpreted it doe to my race. I even have success with some black girls since i come here. But never happened with the white one!
The problem with the body SMV calculation is that it doesn't factor in mostly genetic and skeletal aesthetic factors. Ie: broad shoulders, WSR, hip to shoulder ratio, chest to hip ratio, chest to hip ratio, and WHR. Which are THE MOST IMPORTANT factors of male attractiveness after only face, height, and bf%.
I think these factors vary less most people will fall within a normal/average range and won't be incel because of especially narrow shoulders or wide hips.
@@noway2835 You're not blackpilled if you think genetic factors like your frame are less important than ones you can change like bodyfat and muscle mass.
the most important factor of face rating is... the eyes of the beholder. Don't support scam and scammers making a living out of pseudo-science and lips movment. your rating = your dating success. I dare anyone to rate a face based on an objective text description. You all know you need to see the face first. I hope you got the idea. But I know that WW and Qoves have a rosy future.
In my opinion you don't even have to go very far to know if women/girls find you attractive, just crack a bad joke and see how they react; If they genuinely laugh you're attractive, if they don't and the mood gets messed up then they don't find you attractive. Why do I know this? because I have cracked many bad jokes interacting with girls and for some ungodly reason previously behind my comprehension it still comes off as funny (even if I know deep within it's really not).
That's just a sign of many other signs. It alone confirms absolutely nothing. People laugh all the time over stupid people doing/saying stupid things, as Ryan said.
True. I have a good friend who makes extremely inappropriate jokes and women genuinely laugh at them. Another friends who jokes are just not that funny, and women laugh at them as well. Women find both dudes attractive so they work.
Just meet 10 women and see how they react to you. Huge smile, prolonged eye-to-eye contact and a full body hug = 10. Face scrunched up, quickly looked away and left = 1. But Wheat's method is SMV, not just face+body+height.
Once you pass 6'4, there should be no more additional points. Once you exceed 6'6 you should be deducting half a point. Btw, could refine the P score to take into account girth.
@@thetruthisright6750 no I meant take the mean, if you have a 8/10 girth, and a 6/10 length, you'd have a 7/10 P. WW doesn't account for girth, arguably more important than length. Just like length, you can have a girth chart. (Example: 4.5 inches girth = 3/10, 6 inch girth = 8/10)
I agree, I'm 6'4 and know a few basketball players that are 6'6 (we trained together as kids). I can assure you that starting from 6'3+ girls can be intimidated. I once read a study (based on a poll from a large sample of women) and the curve of attractiveness was continously increasing untill it reaches 6'2-6'3. From that point it decreases a bit (still high, but lower than the 6'2 landmark).
@@sofiane7161 points should max out when the measurement in that category gets to 2 standard deviations from the mean. For example IQ, if 2 standard deviations from mean is 136, then anything exceeding 136 does not confer any advantage SMV wise. I would argue that once you get to 145 and above, you are more likely to be a sperg that reduces your SMV.
@@brentandrew2419 yeah he is constantly overstimasting himself, his face doesnt "tell a story" if u know what i mean, and his ginger hair make him a lil weird moreover he has no muscle, imo he is maximum a 6 considering all the variables
wafffles, you have fleshed out the formula what me and a group of friends were commiserating about in a run down chinese restaurant in nyc back in 1999! We knew the variables, in fact id argue there’s two key variables missing ( “status/clout“ and neurotypical , attractive prosocial behavior “sociability” ) but we couldn’t figure out the weighting. It’s not perfect, but goddamn this is REALLY close, and good enough for use. Thanks for releasing this dissertation
One way you can tell if you're a 5 or below. Walk around a mall or where there are a lot of women, if they rarely ever make eye contact with you, or never smile at you, and you feel invisible to them its means you're simply not attactive to them
I was with my chad/chadlite friend last night and it was incredible seeing how girls reacted to him. It was like being with a celebrity. This was in China, we're both white guys but I get 0 random attention. I would say every third girl either said hello or pointed to her friend about how attractive he was.
@@kidkieran77 Similar situation with me. I live in south east asia. when i go out with my chad/chad-lite friend he gets tons of attention. like you said, celebrity like status attention.
**Brief summary of the current sexual market according to the man physical attractiveness**
Chads (Very atractive): They are besieged by women on a regular basis, no more to say.
Chadlites (Atractive): They have to put more effort than the previous ones but they had some success attracting females in discos, clubs or night bars, approaching girls on the street, on dating applications and social circles.
High tier normie (Not so atractive): He got girlfriends or friends with benefits by maximizing his social circle. Some have even had some success attracting women in late-night bars if they're tall.
Normies (Average): They have to provide a large amount of money to get girlfriends or partners. Some even get them through status, talents or fetishes, mostly they are the submissive part of the relationship. And with some "luck" they can get low quality friends with benefits (married, single mothers, ladies who are over 30 years old...).
Low tier normie (Unatractive): Normally they are involuntary celibate or get laid through escorts/h**s. With enough money/status they can "aspire" to be beta providers and start a family.
Truecels (Very unattractive): The same as the above except that even a large number of h**s do not accept them with all money they have, nor for beta providers.
Agree! using this system, I hope you know your rating and in which category you fall, based solely on your dating success. No need to pay WW or Qoves or any other scammer to give you a subjective number based on pseudo-science.
But we can make it even simplier utilising Face Rating system: 9-10/10 - Yes 8/10 - Yes, but No if Short 7/10 - Yes, but No if Short or Broke 6/10 - No, but Yes if Tall 5/10 - No, but Yes if Tall and Rich 4/10 - No, but Yes if Miracle 1-3/10 - No
@@RefalaStas you really think an 8/10 guy if short is not slaying? an 8/10 guy even if he is 5 foot 6 is gonna basically be a chad lite more or less is gonna be a 6.5, aand thats more than enough to have a good life in the sexual market
It’s like this guy doesn’t realize that after a point, being taller makes you less attractive to women. I’m 6’0 but I feel like the perfect height is somewhere around 6’2.
Not many would have the guts to do this. Very logical and probably fairly accurate. The only thing more objective would be to get 1000 women to look you over naked, interview you and review your finances. I like your "just look at women's faces when they see you for the first time" method of face rating. Just like men, women can size up your physical attractiveness in 1 millisecond.
Yes, but while she might be initially attracted to you, she can reject you if you aren't well off in other areas. My female friends tell about Chad's they reject all the time, even ugly women reject a Chad if he doesn't pass through later filters.
I honestly don't understand why it's -1 smv for "asians". There's a huge difference between East Asians and Southeast Asians. The East Asian guys at my high school are heavily benefiting from just being average East asian zoomers surrounded by many zoomer girls who would see a halo on them for being having the "korean looking" pheno. Totally out of touch with my generation is this generalizing -1 smv
@@yeuuuiuup7714 I have a friend who is from afghanistan, he is muslim. He is/was in love with a white, blonde very attractive german girl. Even thought they loved each other, because my friend is a good looking guy, but the parents of the girls does not accept the ethnic/religion tax of my friend. They forced the daughter out of the relationship and did not allowed her to see him again. They cutted the connection and force the girl to be with a white german guy. My friend's SMV was killed by his ethnic/religion tax, not by his girlfriend, but by the parents of ex-girlfriend.
@@hxndxrs0n815 His entire channel is for delusional incels who can't pull. It's easy for me to say on the internet that I'm 6'5 with hunter eyes, impeccable jawline and get matches every hour. His source is that he made it the f up.
Yeah, for white men aged betwee 20 - 30 it's 5 ft 10.1 or 178 cm. This does depend on the country, but in the UK where I live, it's no more than 178 cm or 5 ft 10. Im a legitimate 6 ft tall guy and feel tallish / tall even amongst the younger generation, and nobody can convince me otherwise unless if it was in the netherlands or Sweden.
@@jakephilips123 I stand 6'2" and was experimenting with an online height percentile chart yesterday. I live in North American and am taller than about 97 per cent of men in either the U.S. or Canada. I starting entering other countries and when I entered either Netherlands or Sweden, that number dropped to 84 per cent!
This was a good system because face and height really did skew the results but still other factors could give you a boost. My face is a 5 and on height I hit a 3, so despite me doing well in the other areas it was close to impossible to get over a 5 overall, which is pretty reflective of how I'm perceived in the west. But I'm a white guy in East Asia and I am walking these streets like I'm a 6.5 and can get some girls. The only contention I have is being black has its advantages in SOME places. Low tier black guys are more likely to get a girl than a low tier white guy. That's just from what I've experienced growing up in London.
Even if I maxed out the variable factors (body, money, IQ?) I would only go from a 4.8 to a 5.5. That really makes gym maxxing not seem worth it as the opportunity cost for the added value is too large. An average face and poor height are really difficult to overcome. Again, that is why it's a good system because that is reflective of reality.
@chris37211 That is true to an extent but it would be hard to push from a 5 to a 6. I'm saying the time it would take to completely max out the body just wouldn't give someone in my situation much of a significant difference. I still gym often by the way (4/5 times a week) but if you're someone like me you shouldn't expect gym maxxing to change your fortunes.
And the ethnic adjustment gets skewed with the baseline chad attribute. A South Asian chad (someone like Hamza or Prabhas or Hrithik Roshan) is probably getting a far lower ethnic judgment as compared to some overweight 5'6 Tamil dude working tech support with a heavy accent. Also, the Ethnic adjustment will probably vary with where you are as well. Indian guys arent getting penalized in India, but Black people are gonna get heavily penalized, while white dudes are gonna have the time of their life (at least with the 0.5% of girls who are actually in the open dating scene). Similarly, black and Latino guys are probably going to be heavily penalized in Eastern Europe, a famously racist place)
I see face is 1a and everything else is 1B because there’s a lot of things maybe your face is average but you’re really tall and you have a good body maybe you play basketball maybe you have a nice face got some money but everything else is average maybe you’re 70 but you got a lot of money but honestly if nothing else just get your money up I know that goes against black pill but if there’s one guaranteed money
I must say, your formula (while not perfect) is quite comprehensive and probably the best objective estimate that a guy can make of their own SMV. Very nice!
I took a mensa IQ test a while back and came back with 142. I'm telling you right now, IQ will make you LESS attractive, not more. You end up not being able to relate to people, and don't find most things regular people find interesting of any interest to you. No one wants to talk about investing, the housing market, books, world events or anything in that area unless you find friends significantly older than yourself. I am 24 and my best friend is 45, that's how different you are and it sucks. Edit: Also you have to hide how easily you can learn things and pass tests or people will covet and hate you for it. I remember passing a certification test in a week that most people need to study months for, and instead of people congradulating me, I was getting picked on for it, and people talked behind my back that I was narcissistic somehow. Not like I rubbed in their face, they asked and I told.
Yup for sure. I think that ~130 is the sweet spot where you're sharp and insightful, but can still connect with people. Much past there (getting into the 140s), you begin to have trouble connecting with people because you're interested in deeper topics and more intellectually stimulating conversation. A lot of the factors in his formula do have an upper limit where they begin to work against you in terms of SMV. Though there are some "niche" women who do like guys who are ridiculously tall/smart/muscular etc.
I wouldn't say IQ itself makes one less attractive, but at most the traits that might come with it. I myself have an IQ of ~135 and like to talk about music, travel, feeling, motivations, ... . So my entire life isn't about math/logic related stuff.
Well for the height rating part of it has to be a bit off. Because in another video, you put a study for which height women prefer and said the most ideal is 6 ft- 6 ft 3. And guys who are over 6 ft 5 is equivalent to being 5 ft 10 or just considered too tall
I don't think the final calculations / score are helpful, but I do think the breakdown of each of these and the percentiles out there are a useful thing to know. Also, one could split this into "superficial" characteristics (face, height, body) which are helpful in finding dates, and the "hidden" characteristics (money, IQ) that help you retain female attention. And, as always, the BEST marker of your SMV is how the opposite sex treats you in your daily interactions.
Had to like the video as soon as I've seen the weighted calculation table. I love how nerdy, clear and calculated you bring across the content and make it accessible to us!
This is a pretty solid calculation. I still feel you should factor in personality and status into the equation though- even though I realise these aren’t easy to measure. If you’re fun to be around and are socially normal, you still get a boost compared to if you’re autistic and annoying to be around for example! Still a very logical way of looking at it all though! 👍.
Status is largely taken into account through your Net worth more than your salary; personality however is hard to measure, maybe a reliable source would be The Big 5 but I would not feel comfortable using a psychological theory to calculate overall SMV
what you're talking about applies if you're normy tier in terms of this rating System. If you're a sub-five or a chad you don't need social skills to change the outcome. Me personally, I got a 7.19 but my game is so trash, that I don't even come close to getting any girls.
Personality has no value to women for sexual market value. It comes after reaching the treshhold needed for dating. Status is already calculated in his money part
Personality/social skills only matter if you cross a certain threshold of attractiveness. You need your foot in the door first. However, if your personality and especially social skills are complete trash, you should subtract points from your score. Doesn't matter that much in the grand scheme of things tho.
There are two market values. Sexual Market Value solely has to do with your physical looks so only height, face, and body have an impact on there. Social Market Value is where money, status, and social aspects have a role. Sexual: *relating to the instincts, physiological processes, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate physical contact between individuals.* Social: *relating to society or its organization. relating to rank and status in society.*
I hate to admit it, but everything he says tracks from my experience. In my 20s (mid-fifties now) I was a solid 6.5-7.0 (but I thought I was an 8). My past dating experiences confirm this rating. Fascinating!
@@-whackd I was referring to his overall rating system. I was 6’1” tall, 200 lbs, fairly athletic, and was working on a physics degree. Based on Wheat Waffles rating system and my own dating experience at the time, I was a 6.5-7.0 in those days.
I personally think it would be reasonable to add "voice" as a part of smv score. Cause in my opinion voice is a physical trait that can add up to your attractiveness. Tenor voice - no points added to your final smv, bariton voice +0.25, bass voice +0.5.
I think there are two more crucial factors to be considered in that rating - emotional intelligence and social intelligence. I believe these things are also significant for women when evaluating a man. For instance, if a chad lacks even basic game and is too logical in his behaviour, he would be cosidered too boring and emotionally numb to start a long term relationship with him, whereas an average guy with good game and decent self-awareness would be seen as a suitable life partner. At least from the perspective of really high quality women.
yeah and it is not like the taller the better... I would say 6ft2 to 6ft4 is the perfect height. Everything above will be a small disadvantage. Everything below will be a significant disadvantage
@@goncalopereira8267 of which population? In my country (Germany) this is very average (slightly above average). And 6ft is a disadvantage relative to 6ft2-6ft4
I appreciate your videos and like most of your content. It is very difficult to create an equation that does not exclude important factors. I believe an accurate equation should incorporate some or all of the factors below. Note that this list is not exhaustive. I am a layman and not an expert on this topic. 1) Age - A young medical or law student in university has a different SMV than a rich 60 year old construction contractor. 2) History - Women care if these things apply to men: diseases, children, divorces, criminal record, bankruptcy, drugs, ect. 3) Location (within a country) - Earning $60,000 USD per year can be very good in certain small towns in USA, but mediocre/poor in LA/New York (depending on a man's age). 4) Position/Career - Women care about a man's position. Is he a labourer or a journeyman? Is he a salesman or a sales manager? Is he a clerk or an executive? 5) Personality - Women care if men are social/socially awkard, interesting, confident, funny, and ect. 6) Game - Women care about how men interact with them, their hygiene, fashion, popularity and how they handle themselves. Lastly, please provide studies that support the importance of penis length. The studies I have seen show penis length as unimportant to most women, and penis girth size (circumference) to be more important than length.
Women don't know all these details before you are banging them. "Oh 60k is too low of a salary for our area" is not something that comes up unless you autisticly say your net worth or salary out loud during the courtship phase. I do agree with you that career title matters much more than his original metric of net worth. But much of the crap you've written here is unknown to women until way after you've hooked her. They don't know whether you've had a bankruptcy. Last chick I was hooking up with asked me maybe a single question about my job over many meetups.
There's no equation, it's pseudo-science to make some money on the internet. Your rating = your dating success. it's for FREE! what if a scammer rated you a 6? will that change your dating success?! why it's a scam? ask anyone on this planet, to rate a face based on an objective text description of angles, symmetries and all the sh*t! EVERYBODY will ask to see the real face first. you can't just add up features and expect to predict the result. I hope you got the idea.
Personally I simply live my life, try to become the best version of myself and if one day I meet a quality woman based on all the standards that I have to protect myself, then I will have a relationship. And if I die alone at least I’m not with the wrong person which is worse IMO.
Try a result based rating to check your math based rating Little/No matches on dating apps = sub 5 Some matches little convo little to no dates = 5-6 Decent matches decent convo rate and some dates = 6-7 Good amount of matches and convo and perhaps 2 or more dates every week = 7-8 As many dates as you can handle off of the apps = 8
My rejection rate has always been 100%. I'm like a 2 on the face at best. $ an 8 easy, body 5, hardware 7 maybe and height right in the middle. Shows how important having a good mug is.
Face 6 Height 5 Body 7 Money 6 P-length 7 IQ 4 I constantly deal with 4/10 and 5/10 and, sometimes, 6/10. Rarely 7/10. Never with 8 and 9. I think this rating it's accurate.
Brutally honest with I.Q. Wheat Waffles is actually wrong about I.Q. Due to sample bias (women who go to university) lower I.Q. scores are actually advantageous.
Some of those factors are heavily influenced by the region where you live in - average height varies (compare Netherlands for example to the Asian ones) and, of course, yearly income - in Eastern Europe where I come from, the average yearly salary is about 15 - 20 000 Euros per year, while in the Western Europe or the U.S., it is 3-times higher. Edit - corrected a mistake - 15 - 20 000 Euros per year
I was gonna comment this exact same thing. I'm south american and here you can barely earn over US$10K annually and still be one on the top 20% of population haha.
Your height distribution at 3:10 is way off… 40% of men are not 6’+. It’s roughly 14.5% in the US and 10% globally. On your scale someone could literally be an 8 in every other category and just because they are 5’8” they would be below a 6.
Yeah the height scale is far too harsh. It’s like a 2 inch difference from average height will not throw you down 2 whole points automatically. Thats ridiculous. Also I don’t know where he got 5’11 from
@@РоссийскаяФедерация-б4я maybe the data was taken in some eastern or northern european country where the average height is actually 5'11 (Norway or Serbia, for example). or the data was taken from a usa state like wyoming or utah that is 5'11 bc they have a lot of north european ancestry. more likely though, he is citing self-reported height data.
@@Pedant_Patrol This problem isnt necessarily exclusive to men. I suppose this could just be a human tendency, and I used to be this way as well (and I still am, just to a lesser extent now, I am who I am and I dont give a shit how others perceive me now) but women also suffer tremendously from this (how they dress may effect how men treat them, aspects of the beauty industry + it capitalizing off the insecurities of women, etc)
I think you are spot on most time. Face rating is pretty accurate Smv is very subjective. Because of some people prioritize different factors higher or lower then other. I am Asian 5 8” but for the girl I date ( Asian ) they are 5- 5’ 2” I am above average for guys they meet. All my pass girlfriend are 8 and above. Looks. Great video
Can you distinguish between her real rating and your thirst? Observing people online, men have very low standards when it comes to women. They call 6s 9, and 7s 10.
she probably was an "8" for looks coz you were with her for some time, women become attractive as you get ot know them by first glance tho i doubt shes an 8 by a stranger
@@chaska8144 Really? For most women it's the opposite for me. I find a lot of women to be attractive, but when I get to know them more I get less attracted to them. lol
@@redpillsatori3020 im not saying its for all women bruh. alot of ugly women become attraactive as u get to know them however some become more unattractive and same applies to attractive women personality has an effect
In my opinion, this video is very useful 10/10 For anyone that wants to know how to find geometric average, using a windows calculator (make sure it the scientific setting), input the total you get for 'score^weight' (The number you'd get where the 83,980,800,000 is) then press '2nd' near the top left, press the 'yrootx' key. Finally, type in the weight total, 15 then press '='
You made a huge mistake in reasoning at 12:39. Once you take geometric average, percentiles do not work the same. For example: You can only get 8 IF all scores are 8 across the board. And that is much more rare than top 1%, more like top 0.01%. A 7 across the board is also much more rare than top 10%.
@@WheatWaffles RIght, but then it is not top 1% if it is impossible, is it? :) I think this part of your video needs a bit more perfecting. 1st man made this exact same point - If you are 6 across the board, then you are an 8.
@@WheatWaffles Also, you forgot to include game / social skills. It is very important, rate it at least with a weight of 3 or 4. I am painfully shy and this is why I never get laid.
I’m 6’2 and 215 pounds at 38 years old. According to the charts I’m considered overweight still. But it doesn’t account for the fact I’m naturally a big guy. I’ve always had big arms and broad shoulders without lifting a finger to get it. Luckily I haven’t gotten the middle age belly and I have all my hair. I get more interest from women now than I did in my 20s 🤷🏼♂️. I’m always getting smiles, hi’s, and they seem to always want to touch me when they are talking. To bad I’m not interested in them anymore. Haven’t been with a woman in 3 years now. Monk mode. I don’t mind them being nice to me but that’s as far as it goes
Why you monk mode now if you getting girls attention at 38 years old. And how did you look in your late 20s to not get attention from girls? I’m 29 and I get more attention from women than I ever did in my late teens and early 20s
@@theworldisimmense I’m monk mode because I choose to be. I’m not pulling a knife out of my back ever again. I was good looking in my 20s and got all kinds of attention but I was young and stupid. I got burned a few times when I shouldn’t have. But I look more mature now so maybe that’s what the more attention is about. Apparently when men maintain a good figure in their 30s they are more attractive than they were in 20s they say 🤷🏼♂️ One day you will find out. Just because you can easily get women doesn’t mean it’s good for you
Yeah that’s cap. If you were at all attractive or got attention from girls you wouldn’t be watching these sad videos that attract ugly, loser guys. These videos are literally just a way to cope for the guys who get 0 female attention.
Now that this video has been made it would be great to see a WW video on how to rate a womans SMV taking into account everything. Such as, age, fitness, body count, kids, ect.
Good idea, accept many men are poor. In the West, that means some Men will take just about any Woman they can get their hands on for sex and maybe even keep her if she has an average amount of resources and is good in bed, completely negating her actual SMV. This sounds drastic but I literally see it everyday.
I think its a pretty good calculation although I dont think the height section is accurate, I think after 6'2-6'3 height you start to get diminishing returns for height, I dont think someone who is 6'6 really has that big of an advantage over someone who is 6'2, other than that everything else seems pretty solid
@@yousef3375 bro not exactly true have you ever been with a girl with over a foot height difference, it is not ideal everything is slightly awkward, 6’2 is the height that appeals to the largest demographic of girls because 5’2 girls wont be too awkward and 6ft girls are still comfortable too, a 6’5 guy girls that are 5’2 and below are just a bit awkward for couple shit like holding hands, kissing, etc, it is still doable of corse but what im saying is there is no real advantage a 6’5-6 guy has over a 6’2-3 guy when it comes to the broad spectrum of dating options, of corse they have an advantage over 6ft+ women but that is such a small percentage of the entire population of woman. In general terms which is what is video is about its about averages and statistics, there wouldn’t be much if any advantage to purely dating past 6’2-3
SMV should include social proof. I've noticed, when I'm alone I'm pretty much invisible. But when I'm with a girl suddenly other girls start checking me out. Company of a pretty woman gives at least couple of extra SMV point. This is why women often chase married men.
It's an Accurate rating system for western countries Only. And its the same criticism i would give for your Channel overall. Everything you say 100% accurate for western countries but there are large cultural and economic conditions in other countries that would give higher value to wealth. In Latin America for example there are no social programs and living wages for low status jobs. The degrees of wealth are definitely more visible you have extream wealth and poverty. In West countries women can remain single and chace Chads and still live a retively comfortable life. I would rate Wealth on par with face looks in Latin America
@Kyler M Looks better. the height of the body and so on does not matter at all. I get fucked up because of my face. The nose is a big minus. The face plays a role.
Face: 4 Height: 6 Body: 5 Money: 3 P-size: 4 IQ: 5 = 3,87 SMV It's accurate. I always rated myself as a 4-5/10. 27 right now, had only 1 girlfriend in my life and never had casual sex. I'm like invisible. Very rare there are 3/10 women interested in me.
I think the race adjustment could be improved. First off, adding SMV points for being white only applies to women for whom whiteness is an advantage (specifically Latina/Asian women). Otherwise, it makes more sense to keep White as neutral (add zero), whilst subtracting points for less advantageous ethnicities. Also, "Asian" is too broad a category. We know for a fact that being east Asian (Korean/Chinese/Japanese) is generally more advantageous than being south east Asian (Cambodian, Vietnamese, etc.), so the disparity must be accounted for. With the advent of Korean pretty boys like BTS, I'd even argue that East Asians have been slowly ascending the SMV ladder past Indians.
Money score should be adjusted according to location: eg. you do online work and make $60K a year income while living in the US = average, the same $60K a year living in Colombia = high upper class.
I think I’m the only woman who watches all your videos. I just love the amount of effort and technicality that goes behind his reasonings. WW quantifies the things most guys know or will find out about dating.
@@salvajegata2222 Would you date a man who's into black pill? Most women I know say it's anti-women. However, I think that statement is from a misunderstanding of black pill. Considering you watch WW, would you?
Funny, my score matched your final result perfectly. Just shows you can have a lot of good things going for your but if your face isn’t above average and you’re in the west, not good 😂
Hi @wheatwaffles! :).. I'm a woman with some experience in dating... And I believe there's one really important variable you're not taking in account to calculate SMV in Men... And for me at least was one of the most important when considering dating and not lose interest in a particular guy.... I would call it "Touch"...i've dated some guys that while they were way above average in looks, appearance, status, etc.. Just didn't know how to touch a woman the right way, and they couldn't please me even when I tried to teach them.... Then again there were other guys that weren't as attractive but were extremely talented with "touch" and that just made me want them so much more.... BTW loving your videos debunking dating into numbers.. Keep the good job🙂👏👌
While what you're saying is valid, I think this video is more for guys who can't even get woman to go out with them. They need to hit these markers before you would even get to the "touch" phase.
@@nightrider9596 well you don't want to just get her... if you want to see her again and keep her interested "touch" is important... More than looks (face and physic)... At least for me... Of course everyone is different... 🙃
@@ifechimichael6006 I agree with the general premise, but I do think that the drop off is too severe. I think that part of the calculation needs to be reworked a bit.
I believe the drop off is that severe, I spent a bit of time thinking this through before outlining in the video. Trust me being in college is wayyy easier than not being, it is the only place I consistently see low tier normies in with a chance. In all other places, low tier normies are invisible
@@WheatWaffles hey shouldn't you go even with your way? When you are a white dude in a college in the west because: white +0.5 college +0.5 the west -1 and i would definitely debate the math behind S. America and the west. The west in my opinion would only nock of 0.5 points and S. America adds nothing.
@@WheatWaffles yeah but you’re rating system penalises everyone for not currently being in uni (in the western world) but 1.5 points, even chads? I don’t believe this is at all accurate
i disagree with the height part like if you're an 8 but 6 foot (5.5) the overall score will go lower even if its only one point or less its still make a different, again being 6 ft 8 or even 7 ft is putting you in a nich market and again you will have less appeal to a lot of girls so yeah i think being 6 ft 2 is 8 and not 6.5 and adding few inches to that put you in a niche market and make you lose points
@@MakinItHappenn i don't really care about wheat heigh or even his face rating if someone is teaching you a message look at the message not the messenger and i really agree with you about the short girl stuff
I think the physical attributes you use are mostly good, though style and grooming are also important too. I also wouldn't rate height as more important than body. And penis length isn't really important in practice bc by the time someone knows it, it no longer matters. Money and iq don't really matter for smv imo. Lifestyle, status, and personality/game are much more important. But you can't easily quantify those of course
P-length one threw me off too, and I think IQ should be weighted more (considering that having a high IQ helps you "jester-maxx", earn more, dominate other males intellectually, etc..), but you are wrong on the height thing--height is SUPER important. Ask any short guy. I'm 6'1" tall and I know it mostly due to my height that I was able to get laid on occasion in my 20s.
@@redpillsatori3020 It's not true I'm a 6'3.6 ft (192cm) face better. I would like to be lower but have a face. 180 cm is the ideal height above the bust it is not needed. Women always say they don't like the face and see you later.
hey wheat waffles im a very very tall person i struggle a lot w girls. ive never given a kiss to a girl and im 30+. i think you overestimated height just like tails. ive never goten a compliment for my height its like face halos everything face = smv
@@MakinItHappenn i really dont now what to do. im in that elongated face section. ww gave me a 4.5/10 (closer to 5) and nero a 5.25/10. he said i needed muscle but ive been going to the gym for over 5 years and i still look almost the same. its very frustrating. since people say i should be getting girls but girls dont even think i exist. its like im invisible to them. id rather be 5.5 then my current height if it would give me even a point in face
So I bought wheat waffles face rating and I’m 4 added to the fact that I’m over 300 pounds at 5’11 made Gave me a 4 after all calcs. Harsh but definitely helpful since my money Iq and p length was decently rated. This lets me know what I’ve always known. Soon as I lose weight I’ll be where I need to be. Cheers to black pill for the reality check
From personal experience Height compensates hard. I am six feet which is top 1% in my country. (South East Asia) I am about a 7 at best. Good Hunter Eyes paired with average all else. Most girls often complimented my height above everything. I also had a classmate who is 5'11 who was the third tallest in the class. He had terrible recession, crooked teeth, long midface and bug eyes. About a 4 at best. What was shocking was that he used to get girls with his height alone. Even today I saw some girls commenting that he is model tier handsome. It could be possible that in my culture Height trumps face. And from my personal experience. All the guys girl were crazy about in my highschool were notably tall (Top 5%).
Tbh one thing that should get added is "EQ". I'd argue that having an outgoing, charming personality is up there with stuff like IQ. If this were the case my score would go down so much.
You already got this wrong on the very first metric. It’s been shown in studies women start to think guys are less attractive after 6’ 2” - 6’ 3” it doesn’t continue to linearly go up in score equivalent to total height. Otherwise Boban would be an 8 in height and chicks aren’t trying to date a guy that’s 7’ 5”
I heard there was a study that 6’2” is the perfect height according to girls, so shouldn’t that be given the 8 score? And as the man gets taller he actually loses slight SMV points in height
Love your work waffles. Height destroyed me!!🤦🏿♂️. I knew height would crush me, but dang😫. I am doing good in every area (except height), fantastic in one, but the height pill still wins again🙃. I believe this just proves again what you were saying about having average scores across the board being better than killing it at some and at the very bottom of others. My score was scary low, but I still think your method is correct.
@@nolungs8652 I am! But you have to get pass the barrier to entry first🤦🏿♂️I. Never get to showing off because my height stops all attempts before I get to show them where I am blessed at.
I’d say this seems fairly legit. It puts me just over a 6.5. My face is only a 5 because I have little lower jaw and chin projection and my eye area is mid because of lack of skeletal support and slightly saggy looking upper eyelids with a slightly negative canthial tilt. The rest of my face is quite attractive (eyebrow geometry, eyelashes, eye shape and colour, maxilla width, decent nose) My wealth is slightly above average for my age group but not significantly (making 60k per year in a smaller town) , iq is quite high, body fat low, p length high (90% or better) and what really saves me is my height of 6 4” / 6 5” (99%). I think it’s fair that my facial flaws sink me quite a bit but I have almost everything else going for me or not holding me back and have about the amount of female attention a 6.5 in theory should receive. (A couple of new girls added on Snapchat from tinder per week, most of the girls ranging between 3 and 6.) the one thing I might add is that penis size may matter slightly more if it was something known about prior to engaging with women considering a bad penis makes you smv much lower even if having a big one can’t save an ugly guy.
I get the general idea of this but it definitely has it's problems, first of all height is not a linear progression of scoring, if you are above 6 feet you will never have problems with height, I am 6'1 and I have never had a girl tell me I'm too short, above 6'2 there is no gain and the difference between 6'0 and 6'2 is negligible, it does however change depending on the height of your friends, if you have 1 inch on all of your friends as the gang comes in it can make a difference. Under 6 feet there is a big drop off, mainly because the number sounds good but also 6'0 is the first perceivably tall height, below 5'10 your height will become a problem and a big one for a lot of women, the difference between the lower heights is also negligible, doesn't matter if you're 5'4 or 5'7 you're still short. I feel like you've done body reasonably well but shape is more important that leanness, as long as you don't have a fatty face because of excess weight. It is way more important to a girl that she feels protected than she have a 6 pack to run her hand over, but of course height has a role in that as well. Finance is more lifestyle than actual finance, a girl really doesn't give a fuck if you're 100k in debt and being a retard with your money in the sexual market place, in a relationship setting it may matter, but a guy with no debt driving a shit box is the same as a guy in student debts driving a shit box, money is more about perception of money in the sexual marketplace. Penis size I don't believe has any impact at all on smv unless if you're going around telling people your size or if someone you've been with have told a load of people, she will not know your size until you've gotten her into bed. IQ is a good one that a lot of people miss out so well done for including it, women do value intelligence, but they value it more in a sense of competency than straight up intelligence, competency as a rating is far more valuable, a girl needs to trust that if she has a problem she can come to you and you are competent enough to get it sorted for her. There are two huge things that I believe you have missed however, one is social hierarchy/ dominance I know a guy who had a near perfect face, guy could have been a model, but he got no girls because if anyone ever challenged him in any way he crumbled, he truly let people walk all over him, he would walk into a party and 3 girls would start staring at him, any random dude would come over say hello to a girl he was talking to and he would just crumble and girls notice things like that. The other one is emotional intelligence and knowledge of female psychology, 90 percent of men don't know that women do not think like men, most men simply do not know what women are after and what makes a woman think about you, there is an extreme bump in smv to any guy who knows how to make a woman feel like a fucking Disney princess, make her feel like what she imagined love was like when she was a kid, make her feel that excitement of her first bf, that is massive. However for this last point you need to have enough smv for a girl to agree to going on a date with you, that's often the hard bit.
@@anon2034 I am working on everything I can change of course. There are suposedly efective methods to increase p size, girth and length, but I havent tried them and dont need them.
Bravo. You have put a lot of work into this. Maybe, it needs refinements and adjustments but it seems pretty solid. I always thought about creating an equation to rate SMV, but you have done it. Congratulations.
I think the height rating is not correct. Taller is not automatically better because it would mean that a guy who is 220 cm is more attractive (height-wise) than a guy who is 185 cm. Most normal sized women will probably prefer the 185 cm guy. The 220 cm guy will definitely get more attention but that is not necessarily SMV-related attention. Height attractiveness is a curve with a peak somewhere between 178 and 192 cm in Western countries.
Y’all know that like women are not adhering to or endorsing these standards right? This idea entirely exists within this community. It is assigning value to each characteristic differently than is truly reflected by the opinions of the general population, on top of falsely assuming everyone has the same preferences. It also completely leaves out personality traits, which are a bigger factor in what women find attractive. Whatever number you end up with at the end of this just tells you how other men who buy into this system and their perceived value of these characteristics think about you, not women or even the average person regardless of sex/gender.
An interesting concept, drives home the point that you should focus on improving your weakest attributes if at all possible. I have to query the ratings somewhat though: I don't think being at College matters one jot, certainly didn't change the amount of attention I would get from women when I graduated. There are just more women at college, your rating doesn't change, graduates can go to bars frequented by college students just fine - it's what I did for years. P-size is also very over-weighted here, I'm not sure if it really matters at all. When you are dressed, it will be impossible to tell the difference between a man having a 5" or 7" erect length. If you can't notice the difference until you're in the bedroom, it doesn't effect your ability to attract a women in the first place. In the bedroom itself, it's only one component of sexual performance, albeit an fairly important one. If it belongs on this chart at all, then it should be given a weighting of 1. But in reality, I don't think women care if you're around the average. Remove points for
the penis length is probably because the rating is for sexual market value. meaning, your attractiveness to being a sexual partner. if you're about to have sex because you were attractive enough to get a girl to a bed but your dick is small as fuck, she's probably not going to fuck with you. hence, a smaller penis size lowers your overall smv.
@@harsh3948 he is talking about college degree won't help him on dating at all cause nowadays in 2022 women can make their own money too and have their own education.
P size was the dumbest measure point from this video. Do he know any women who truly thinks 18cm is a good P size? That's just the other extreme of the P size, and it hurts or intimidates most woman. Because he lives in England me may not know stories of those types of people with woman.
@@thetruthisright6750 ..yeah, and lie about IQ, like WW said. I know my social skills and game sucks horribly--I'm probably a 1 in both, but having a decent face and being 6'1" tall helped me a lot.
Face 4 Height 3 Body 6 Money 7 P length 6 IQ 7 Got 3.7 because I live in West (out of Uni) and Brown 😭 Pretty accurate though, I thought my SMV was around 4 without the calculation.
welcome to the club. got 3.62, same as you : brown guy living in Europe. lost 2 solid points but it's pretty accurate regarding my score in Tinder and to how girls respond to me.
There are several misconceptions here: 1. taller is not better 2. leaner is not better 3. bigger is not better For each point there is an optimal range. The evaluation of the body is also far too superficial. Here it depends decisively on proportions. At the end, one could make a separate video series on the subject.
Great video, I think that I found a easier method for the formula : You can take your score in every single field and multiply it by the wheight of that particular field and add all up and in the end you divide by 15 (the sum of all wheight). Ex: Face : 6 Height : 5 Body : 6 Money : 5 PP : 7 Iq : 6 (6x5)+(5x3)+(6x2)+(5x2)+(7x2)+6 = 87 87 ÷15 = 5.8 It's a little less accurate but easier
@@SUPEREVIL6668 do it liek this : let google do the math : grab your numbers like this (2 steps) first step ---> face^5 * hight^3 * body^2 * money^2 * dick^2 * inteligence^1 = big-number second step ---> big-number^(1/15) = final value
8/10 face = 8^5 = 32768 points. 10/10 height = 10^3 = 1000 points. Perfect height is only 3,5% the value of a perfect face according to Wheat Waffles SMV calculation
Remember that personality can play big factor in your realistic success rate. From personal experience, having the ability to be an entertaining conversationalist and having confidence can certainly add 0.5 to 1 point to your score.
I’m 5’9 I have a great face and very muscular, I’ve been turned down once by a female off of a dating app because of my height, funny thing she was short and kinda fat, with a nice face, I’ve never been turned down or told I got a boyfriend, I’ve taken out almost every female I’ve approached ! Height is not the be all end all! Complete nonsense! If your face is good and you’re taller than who you approach, there won’t be any issues at all!
@@dae1925 exactly! I was literally 1 time, and honestly I think she knew the second she saw me there was no way I would take her seriously, she knew her value compared to mine, in fact most women I’ve been with threw themselves at me! I even had a situation where my tall lanky blonde haired friend probably about 6’2” did modeling for a jeans company, had women choose me in the friend group! So height may be important to some females, but it’s definitely no a deciding factor when the 5’9 guy 5’10 in shoes has a good face and body! Sorry just not buying it! I’ve lived it
@@jsav4269 yes as long as you have average height / it change not so much your rating between 5'10 and 6'2 because a 6'2 average face will be less succesful than a 5'10 with good face
The height chart made this whole video lose its credibility because the taller you are doesnt make you more attractive especially when above 6'4". In an ideal world women prefer 6-6'4 as the peak (8 points) then you should reduce the points the further away you get from that peak range from both ends.
Interesting content as usual, but the height component is a bit off. The difference between 5'11 and 6'2 is not the same as the difference between 5'11 and 5'8. Also, I don't think being average height affects SMV. But according to this system a chad or chadlite would have their scored lowered for being 5'11. I don't agree.
I took the Hubbard IQ test at UT Austin and got a 133, I have a Master degree in chemistry: Jordan Peterson says that to do well in this major you need a 130 IQ minimum, but I still put 120 IQ
3:37 where did you get that chart and data? I can’t seem to find it doing a reverse image search. Also, how is 6 ft 6 or above only an 8? Wouldn’t that be a 10, since it is the ideal height and top 1% height? Another point, how is 5 ft 11 average height in males 18-30 in the U.S? I searched the web and it seems that 5 ft 9 is average.
We just had a poll where 14% of viewers believed they had a genius level IQ in the top 1%.
Self-assessed SMV will always be dangerous at best.
Just need to correlate with another test you took in the past. ACT, SAT, ASVAB, etc.
those 14% are just STEMcels.
IQ is so useless anyway, no woman will ever care even if her life were on the line lol
They’re still on the copium
Well, like any model, the accuracy of it's output is dependent on the quality of the data that is input. If people want accurate results, they need to do a test that will give them an accurate figure.
Many of your viewers won't need a calculator. They have genius level IQ.
"Genius" is 160. 130 is Mensa about 2%.
Actual geniuses are people who are smart enough but not emotionally crippled, and able to accomplish stuff.
@@edheldude genius is 140
@@edheldude genius isn't mutually exclusive, you can still have autism, asbergers, and adhd with a genius iq, preventing you from achieving what you internally know you can accomplish. Being a genius masks the the conditions to the point where everyone thinks your just wasting potential and don't have a work ethic.
@@chaska8144 genius is at least 15 points higher than 140
I was going to give my face a 4.5, but rounded down to 4 just so I didn't need a calculator for that part. There should probably be a 2pt penalty at the end for making choices like that :)
You are taking this too far. I thought I was watching a forex trading webinar.
Lol
Jhaaaa!🤣🤣👍> to much mathematics
@@raymundogonzalez6450 jha ?
@@peacock9473 I am a player in tinder and zook( lot of options / women) I know for my own experience!!!
Me to... Weird part of TH-cam again
As one of the 14% high IQ subscribers, I need to highlight a fundamental flaw in your math. The final mean does not have the same percentile distribution as the input factors. In more mathematical terms, "the variance of an average is not the average of the variances".
Here is the actual percentile chart for the final rating, for those who actually did the calculation:
8: 4.1
7: 3.7
6: 3.5
5: 3.2
4: 2.9
3: 2.7
2: 2.2
1: 1.8
I didn't bother to take into account the race/location at the end. Also, I assumed that input factors are not correlated, which is likely not the case. I didn't expect the numbers to be this low, but it makes sense: being an 8 on your scale requires being an 8 on all factors, each of which has a chance of 1%. That's a statistical impossibility. Throw in the geometric mean thing and I think it makes sense for the number to be very low.
Thanks! That‘s a huge flaw, I can‘t believe no one else (except for one or two more comments) noticed this…
Yes, I noticed the final number was a bit off. That is ok though, the real value for me was having an objective rating and seeing how it was weighted (IE face is important than P size) and what I could aim for in order to improve my individual "ratings". The final number, I could take or leave.
Hey, I know it's been a while, but are you saying that people with a calculated SMV of 4.1 are in the top 1%? Just making sure I'm interpreting you correctly
I think there are some small issues with your system:
1. Your ethnicity and location adjustments implies that Asian/Indian in non-college west can NEVER exceed 6, which means they can never break into the top 10%. I think this due to ethnicity adjustment improperly affecting all factors (for example, if I am a millionaire, my ethnicity won’t change its actual value), thus I think you should move ethnicity to be an adjustment for maybe just face (which is still a big factor). Location adjustment also implies that NO ONE in the non-college west can ever exceed 7.5, but you can have say a perfect 8 white male in SEA in college be a 10 out of a possible 8? In addition, rich mf on online dating apps completely negate all location adjustments because they can simply fly their women to their location. Thus I think location should be re-thought out for this system.
2. Factors that are difficult for women to measure publicly (p-length and IQ) shouldn’t be on this system. This system measures SMV. Unless you put your P-length (you weirdo) or IQ on your tinder profile or you walk around with that info on a badge, this will only be known after the fact and thus wouldn’t impact SMV.
3. I think your money weighting is too low. A lot of women are willing to leave a poor Chad making minimum wage for a rich, short, ugly mf. Since money is one of the few factors that can partially compensate enough to allow for a rich butt a$$ ugly guy to poach a poor Chad’s girl, it’s weighting should at least partially reflect that possibility.
Overall a good idea, the adjustments above are just small improvements for an overall solid system.
As a black guy living in west for the past six years, I learned that ,average white guy has way better advantage that avarage non white guy on dating market. When it comes to Asian guy there is the common "small dick "stereotypes . How ever i don't get it why an Indian guy has to subtract from there SMV because of race? To be honest i fill like 90% of white girs are not open to date black guy.
I think your 1st point makes sense but I disagree with your 2nd and 3rd.
@@wukirmaskal7419 as a black guy born in london i have to strongly disagree. I dont struggle to attract women at all. I have a south asian friend that thinks women prefer black guys because of how well i do with women. In reality he has no social skills and smell horribly all the time. What im saying is its likely your lacking in other areas and are misinterpreting it as a race. Even wheat only gave white guys a .5 plus.
@@pullupenyojer I think the tricky piece is that the weighting for money can’t be static for everyone. I think depending on how ugly, out of shape, etc. you are, the lower the weighting because If you are trying to use money to compensate for your weaker areas, then it should be related to how much the woman feels repulsed/disgusted/unimpressed/etc. by you due to how much variance there is between you and her ideal man.
@@santiagocandela354 I didn't had problem of attracting even 8s and 9s when i was in my country. All of a sudden every thing is changed when i come to Europe. I expected the same results with girls but the situation is shocking for me. I believe games are mostly international. There is of course a culture difference, however I'm smart enough to understand it. I even joined university in the west and I'm average in look and height. I used to date above average girls (you might know how beautiful are Ethiopian girls ) . When i struggled to date a 3 / 10 white girls, I interpreted it doe to my race. I even have success with some black girls since i come here. But never happened with the white one!
The problem with the body SMV calculation is that it doesn't factor in mostly genetic and skeletal aesthetic factors. Ie: broad shoulders, WSR, hip to shoulder ratio, chest to hip ratio, chest to hip ratio, and WHR. Which are THE MOST IMPORTANT factors of male attractiveness after only face, height, and bf%.
nope all the things he listed are more important than this
I think these factors vary less most people will fall within a normal/average range and won't be incel because of especially narrow shoulders or wide hips.
@@noway2835 You're not blackpilled if you think genetic factors like your frame are less important than ones you can change like bodyfat and muscle mass.
He factors those in the body score I think
the most important factor of face rating is... the eyes of the beholder.
Don't support scam and scammers making a living out of pseudo-science and lips movment. your rating = your dating success.
I dare anyone to rate a face based on an objective text description. You all know you need to see the face first. I hope you got the idea.
But I know that WW and Qoves have a rosy future.
In my opinion you don't even have to go very far to know if women/girls find you attractive, just crack a bad joke and see how they react; If they genuinely laugh you're attractive, if they don't and the mood gets messed up then they don't find you attractive.
Why do I know this? because I have cracked many bad jokes interacting with girls and for some ungodly reason previously behind my comprehension it still comes off as funny (even if I know deep within it's really not).
Some people laugh at stupid jokes because it’s stupid.
That's just a sign of many other signs. It alone confirms absolutely nothing.
People laugh all the time over stupid people doing/saying stupid things, as Ryan said.
True. I have a good friend who makes extremely inappropriate jokes and women genuinely laugh at them. Another friends who jokes are just not that funny, and women laugh at them as well. Women find both dudes attractive so they work.
@@ryanleonidas6839
Can't agree more
Just meet 10 women and see how they react to you. Huge smile, prolonged eye-to-eye contact and a full body hug = 10. Face scrunched up, quickly looked away and left = 1. But Wheat's method is SMV, not just face+body+height.
Once you pass 6'4, there should be no more additional points. Once you exceed 6'6 you should be deducting half a point. Btw, could refine the P score to take into account girth.
I agree, the P score should be Length score + Girth Score / 2
@@tank_tr1ckster184 bro the points don’t go up anymore once you get to seven inches
@@thetruthisright6750 no I meant take the mean, if you have a 8/10 girth, and a 6/10 length, you'd have a 7/10 P. WW doesn't account for girth, arguably more important than length. Just like length, you can have a girth chart. (Example: 4.5 inches girth = 3/10, 6 inch girth = 8/10)
I agree, I'm 6'4 and know a few basketball players that are 6'6 (we trained together as kids). I can assure you that starting from 6'3+ girls can be intimidated. I once read a study (based on a poll from a large sample of women) and the curve of attractiveness was continously increasing untill it reaches 6'2-6'3. From that point it decreases a bit (still high, but lower than the 6'2 landmark).
@@sofiane7161 points should max out when the measurement in that category gets to 2 standard deviations from the mean. For example IQ, if 2 standard deviations from mean is 136, then anything exceeding 136 does not confer any advantage SMV wise. I would argue that once you get to 145 and above, you are more likely to be a sperg that reduces your SMV.
Being ginger should remove exactly 6.726 points from your smv
"I think we'd all agree that a 6.72 is accurate" lmao. Waffles inhales copium daily
So only his P-size variable remain
@@brentandrew2419I give waffles a 4 tops bro. No hate but he looks extremely feminine.
@@pythonp7217 Agree. No chick is going to see Waffles and say "that prissy ginger is hotter than Micheal B. Jordan"
@@brentandrew2419 yeah he is constantly overstimasting himself, his face doesnt "tell a story" if u know what i mean, and his ginger hair make him a lil weird moreover he has no muscle, imo he is maximum a 6 considering all the variables
wafffles, you have fleshed out the formula what me and a group of friends were commiserating about in a run down chinese restaurant in nyc back in 1999! We knew the variables, in fact id argue there’s two key variables missing ( “status/clout“ and neurotypical , attractive prosocial behavior “sociability” ) but we couldn’t figure out the weighting. It’s not perfect, but goddamn this is REALLY close, and good enough for use. Thanks for releasing this dissertation
One way you can tell if you're a 5 or below.
Walk around a mall or where there are a lot of women, if they rarely ever make eye contact with you, or never smile at you, and you feel invisible to them its means you're simply not attactive to them
I was with my chad/chadlite friend last night and it was incredible seeing how girls reacted to him. It was like being with a celebrity. This was in China, we're both white guys but I get 0 random attention. I would say every third girl either said hello or pointed to her friend about how attractive he was.
@@kidkieran77 Similar situation with me. I live in south east asia. when i go out with my chad/chad-lite friend he gets tons of attention. like you said, celebrity like status attention.
That's the issue for me
Almost no women my age in my town- too many guys. I think I'll need to leave eventually
@@Hypnotically_Caucasian where it is? My place is absolutely the same, men are 10x min more than women.
i got a 6 as my final calculated smv, im 6'2, and i never get smiles or eye contact from women
**Brief summary of the current sexual market according to the man physical attractiveness**
Chads (Very atractive): They are besieged by women on a regular basis, no more to say.
Chadlites (Atractive): They have to put more effort than the previous ones but they had some success attracting females in discos, clubs or night bars, approaching girls on the street, on dating applications and social circles.
High tier normie (Not so atractive): He got girlfriends or friends with benefits by maximizing his social circle. Some have even had some success attracting women in late-night bars if they're tall.
Normies (Average): They have to provide a large amount of money to get girlfriends or partners. Some even get them through status, talents or fetishes, mostly they are the submissive part of the relationship. And with some "luck" they can get low quality friends with benefits (married, single mothers, ladies who are over 30 years old...).
Low tier normie (Unatractive): Normally they are involuntary celibate or get laid through escorts/h**s. With enough money/status they can "aspire" to be beta providers and start a family.
Truecels (Very unattractive): The same as the above except that even a large number of h**s do not accept them with all money they have, nor for beta providers.
Agree!
using this system, I hope you know your rating and in which category you fall, based solely on your dating success.
No need to pay WW or Qoves or any other scammer to give you a subjective number based on pseudo-science.
But we can make it even simplier utilising Face Rating system:
9-10/10 - Yes
8/10 - Yes, but No if Short
7/10 - Yes, but No if Short or Broke
6/10 - No, but Yes if Tall
5/10 - No, but Yes if Tall and Rich
4/10 - No, but Yes if Miracle
1-3/10 - No
With this good explanation you should start an own bp channel
@@RefalaStas you really think an 8/10 guy if short is not slaying? an 8/10 guy even if he is 5 foot 6 is gonna basically be a chad lite more or less is gonna be a 6.5, aand thats more than enough to have a good life in the sexual market
@@terrore63 depends on the location and female's personal prefference
Mad respect for using this rating system on yourself. Adds massive credibility to this channel tbh. Great content.
i hope this comment is sarcastic
most people will rate themselves slightly above average. And, oh look, his trust me bro weighting turned him to be slightly above average! Shocker!
Yeah - i believe that too. Tbh, however, i thght he was a 6.5 rather than 5.5 in the face.
His SMV should be deducted a couple of points for being Br*tish
@@comicsans1689 Tell me you are an American without telling me you're an American
It’s like this guy doesn’t realize that after a point, being taller makes you less attractive to women. I’m 6’0 but I feel like the perfect height is somewhere around 6’2.
I saw a graphic that said 6'6 and above was starting to become less attractive. You're right, there is a sweet spot.
6’1 - 6’3 are ideal.
I disagree with height one… every height between 6’1-6’4 should be 8/10 … more than that there are many women who don’t like it.
Burt it also further nichemaxxes you. If a woman does like really tall guys then she has less options to pick from
its also just incorrect, google says that the average 20-39 year old is 5'9
@@kairon5249Considering the age range?
6’1-6’2 is 7/10
6’3-6’4+ is 8+
Not many would have the guts to do this. Very logical and probably fairly accurate. The only thing more objective would be to get 1000 women to look you over naked, interview you and review your finances. I like your "just look at women's faces when they see you for the first time" method of face rating. Just like men, women can size up your physical attractiveness in 1 millisecond.
the only thing more unreliable then self-assessed SMV is a womens word on how attractive someone is. There is no way they would be honest.
Yes, but while she might be initially attracted to you, she can reject you if you aren't well off in other areas. My female friends tell about Chad's they reject all the time, even ugly women reject a Chad if he doesn't pass through later filters.
I honestly don't understand why it's -1 smv for "asians". There's a huge difference between East Asians and Southeast Asians. The East Asian guys at my high school are heavily benefiting from just being average East asian zoomers surrounded by many zoomer girls who would see a halo on them for being having the "korean looking" pheno. Totally out of touch with my generation is this generalizing -1 smv
@@citizen6458 True, but they would be honest if they were forced to choose whether to go on a date with you or not (and actually had to do it)
@@yeuuuiuup7714 I have a friend who is from afghanistan, he is muslim. He is/was in love with a white, blonde very attractive german girl. Even thought they loved each other, because my friend is a good looking guy, but the parents of the girls does not accept the ethnic/religion tax of my friend. They forced the daughter out of the relationship and did not allowed her to see him again. They cutted the connection and force the girl to be with a white german guy. My friend's SMV was killed by his ethnic/religion tax, not by his girlfriend, but by the parents of ex-girlfriend.
According to the CDC, average male height in the US is 5'9" for 20 yr olds, how the hell you got 5'11" is a mystery
lol thats what I'm saying too. On his chart, 6 foot to 6 foot 1 range was bigger than 5'6 to 5'7 to 5'8 combined.
@@hxndxrs0n815 His entire channel is for delusional incels who can't pull. It's easy for me to say on the internet that I'm 6'5 with hunter eyes, impeccable jawline and get matches every hour. His source is that he made it the f up.
Yeah, for white men aged betwee 20 - 30 it's 5 ft 10.1 or 178 cm. This does depend on the country, but in the UK where I live, it's no more than 178 cm or 5 ft 10.
Im a legitimate 6 ft tall guy and feel tallish / tall even amongst the younger generation, and nobody can convince me otherwise unless if it was in the netherlands or Sweden.
@@jakephilips123 I stand 6'2" and was experimenting with an online height percentile chart yesterday. I live in North American and am taller than about 97 per cent of men in either the U.S. or Canada. I starting entering other countries and when I entered either Netherlands or Sweden, that number dropped to 84 per cent!
@@jakephilips123 In the Netherlands, where I live, is the AVERAGE male length 6"1 (1.85cm)... ;)
This was a good system because face and height really did skew the results but still other factors could give you a boost. My face is a 5 and on height I hit a 3, so despite me doing well in the other areas it was close to impossible to get over a 5 overall, which is pretty reflective of how I'm perceived in the west. But I'm a white guy in East Asia and I am walking these streets like I'm a 6.5 and can get some girls.
The only contention I have is being black has its advantages in SOME places. Low tier black guys are more likely to get a girl than a low tier white guy. That's just from what I've experienced growing up in London.
Even if I maxed out the variable factors (body, money, IQ?) I would only go from a 4.8 to a 5.5. That really makes gym maxxing not seem worth it as the opportunity cost for the added value is too large. An average face and poor height are really difficult to overcome. Again, that is why it's a good system because that is reflective of reality.
@chris37211 That is true to an extent but it would be hard to push from a 5 to a 6. I'm saying the time it would take to completely max out the body just wouldn't give someone in my situation much of a significant difference. I still gym often by the way (4/5 times a week) but if you're someone like me you shouldn't expect gym maxxing to change your fortunes.
Tool size is very,very important and none of those PUAS come close to mentioning it.
And the ethnic adjustment gets skewed with the baseline chad attribute. A South Asian chad (someone like Hamza or Prabhas or Hrithik Roshan) is probably getting a far lower ethnic judgment as compared to some overweight 5'6 Tamil dude working tech support with a heavy accent.
Also, the Ethnic adjustment will probably vary with where you are as well. Indian guys arent getting penalized in India, but Black people are gonna get heavily penalized, while white dudes are gonna have the time of their life (at least with the 0.5% of girls who are actually in the open dating scene). Similarly, black and Latino guys are probably going to be heavily penalized in Eastern Europe, a famously racist place)
I see face is 1a and everything else is 1B because there’s a lot of things maybe your face is average but you’re really tall and you have a good body maybe you play basketball maybe you have a nice face got some money but everything else is average maybe you’re 70 but you got a lot of money but honestly if nothing else just get your money up I know that goes against black pill but if there’s one guaranteed money
I must say, your formula (while not perfect) is quite comprehensive and probably the best objective estimate that a guy can make of their own SMV. Very nice!
I took a mensa IQ test a while back and came back with 142. I'm telling you right now, IQ will make you LESS attractive, not more.
You end up not being able to relate to people, and don't find most things regular people find interesting of any interest to you.
No one wants to talk about investing, the housing market, books, world events or anything in that area unless you find friends significantly older than yourself.
I am 24 and my best friend is 45, that's how different you are and it sucks.
Edit: Also you have to hide how easily you can learn things and pass tests or people will covet and hate you for it. I remember passing a certification test in a week that most people need to study months for, and instead of people congradulating me, I was getting picked on for it, and people talked behind my back that I was narcissistic somehow. Not like I rubbed in their face, they asked and I told.
100 percent
Yup for sure. I think that ~130 is the sweet spot where you're sharp and insightful, but can still connect with people. Much past there (getting into the 140s), you begin to have trouble connecting with people because you're interested in deeper topics and more intellectually stimulating conversation. A lot of the factors in his formula do have an upper limit where they begin to work against you in terms of SMV. Though there are some "niche" women who do like guys who are ridiculously tall/smart/muscular etc.
I wouldn't say IQ itself makes one less attractive, but at most the traits that might come with it. I myself have an IQ of ~135 and like to talk about music, travel, feeling, motivations, ... . So my entire life isn't about math/logic related stuff.
Agreed, good luck making conversation with the average girl whose life consists of social media, TikTok and reality TV.
You forgot to subtract 5 points if you're ginger
I think other golden ratios in the body could also be included as a metric for the Body category.
Shoulder to waist ratio, Body to Leg ratio, etc.
This
Well for the height rating part of it has to be a bit off. Because in another video, you put a study for which height women prefer and said the most ideal is 6 ft- 6 ft 3. And guys who are over 6 ft 5 is equivalent to being 5 ft 10 or just considered too tall
I don't think the final calculations / score are helpful, but I do think the breakdown of each of these and the percentiles out there are a useful thing to know. Also, one could split this into "superficial" characteristics (face, height, body) which are helpful in finding dates, and the "hidden" characteristics (money, IQ) that help you retain female attention. And, as always, the BEST marker of your SMV is how the opposite sex treats you in your daily interactions.
Had to like the video as soon as I've seen the weighted calculation table. I love how nerdy, clear and calculated you bring across the content and make it accessible to us!
This is a pretty solid calculation.
I still feel you should factor in personality and status into the equation though- even though I realise these aren’t easy to measure.
If you’re fun to be around and are socially normal, you still get a boost compared to if you’re autistic and annoying to be around for example!
Still a very logical way of looking at it all though! 👍.
Status is largely taken into account through your Net worth more than your salary; personality however is hard to measure, maybe a reliable source would be The Big 5 but I would not feel comfortable using a psychological theory to calculate overall SMV
what you're talking about applies if you're normy tier in terms of this rating System. If you're a sub-five or a chad you don't need social skills to change the outcome. Me personally, I got a 7.19 but my game is so trash, that I don't even come close to getting any girls.
Personality has no value to women for sexual market value. It comes after reaching the treshhold needed for dating. Status is already calculated in his money part
the only reason i dont have a girl, fucking autism (not diagnostic, but I act like one)
Personality/social skills only matter if you cross a certain threshold of attractiveness. You need your foot in the door first.
However, if your personality and especially social skills are complete trash, you should subtract points from your score. Doesn't matter that much in the grand scheme of things tho.
There are two market values.
Sexual Market Value solely has to do with your physical looks so only height, face, and body have an impact on there.
Social Market Value is where money, status, and social aspects have a role.
Sexual: *relating to the instincts, physiological processes, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate physical contact between individuals.*
Social: *relating to society or its organization.
relating to rank and status in society.*
I hate to admit it, but everything he says tracks from my experience. In my 20s (mid-fifties now) I was a solid 6.5-7.0 (but I thought I was an 8). My past dating experiences confirm this rating. Fascinating!
Did your IQ rating really bring in the women
@@-whackd I was referring to his overall rating system. I was 6’1” tall, 200 lbs, fairly athletic, and was working on a physics degree. Based on Wheat Waffles rating system and my own dating experience at the time, I was a 6.5-7.0 in those days.
@@aitken1965 I belive those were some great days
I personally think it would be reasonable to add "voice" as a part of smv score. Cause in my opinion voice is a physical trait that can add up to your attractiveness. Tenor voice - no points added to your final smv, bariton voice +0.25, bass voice +0.5.
I think there are two more crucial factors to be considered in that rating - emotional intelligence and social intelligence. I believe these things are also significant for women when evaluating a man. For instance, if a chad lacks even basic game and is too logical in his behaviour, he would be cosidered too boring and emotionally numb to start a long term relationship with him, whereas an average guy with good game and decent self-awareness would be seen as a suitable life partner. At least from the perspective of really high quality women.
@trollololol Why not? Aren't more precise calculations better?
Bro how 186cm is 6/10 that's way too harsh and unrealistic imo
186cm perfect height xd
yeah and it is not like the taller the better... I would say 6ft2 to 6ft4 is the perfect height. Everything above will be a small disadvantage. Everything below will be a significant disadvantage
@@RECOVER361 6ft is 10% of the population, 6ft is a very decent height and a advantage already
@@goncalopereira8267 of which population? In my country (Germany) this is very average (slightly above average).
And 6ft is a disadvantage relative to 6ft2-6ft4
I appreciate your videos and like most of your content. It is very difficult to create an equation that does not exclude important factors.
I believe an accurate equation should incorporate some or all of the factors below. Note that this list is not exhaustive. I am a layman and not an expert on this topic.
1) Age - A young medical or law student in university has a different SMV than a rich 60 year old construction contractor.
2) History - Women care if these things apply to men: diseases, children, divorces, criminal record, bankruptcy, drugs, ect.
3) Location (within a country) - Earning $60,000 USD per year can be very good in certain small towns in USA, but mediocre/poor in LA/New York (depending on a man's age).
4) Position/Career - Women care about a man's position. Is he a labourer or a journeyman? Is he a salesman or a sales manager? Is he a clerk or an executive?
5) Personality - Women care if men are social/socially awkard, interesting, confident, funny, and ect.
6) Game - Women care about how men interact with them, their hygiene, fashion, popularity and how they handle themselves.
Lastly, please provide studies that support the importance of penis length. The studies I have seen show penis length as unimportant to most women, and penis girth size (circumference) to be more important than length.
nonie hesch gfiggt
All these don’t matter if the girls she wasn’t attracted to you by your LOOKS at first.
@@cortex6482 du au nöd ;)
Women don't know all these details before you are banging them. "Oh 60k is too low of a salary for our area" is not something that comes up unless you autisticly say your net worth or salary out loud during the courtship phase. I do agree with you that career title matters much more than his original metric of net worth. But much of the crap you've written here is unknown to women until way after you've hooked her. They don't know whether you've had a bankruptcy. Last chick I was hooking up with asked me maybe a single question about my job over many meetups.
There's no equation, it's pseudo-science to make some money on the internet.
Your rating = your dating success. it's for FREE! what if a scammer rated you a 6? will that change your dating success?!
why it's a scam?
ask anyone on this planet, to rate a face based on an objective text description of angles, symmetries and all the sh*t! EVERYBODY will ask to see the real face first.
you can't just add up features and expect to predict the result. I hope you got the idea.
Personally I simply live my life, try to become the best version of myself and if one day I meet a quality woman based on all the standards that I have to protect myself, then I will have a relationship.
And if I die alone at least I’m not with the wrong person which is worse IMO.
Golden Mindset 🥇
chronically online
No but fr tho. I thought i would get some advice on face care and body with some social level tips but this is stupid.
Try a result based rating to check your math based rating
Little/No matches on dating apps = sub 5
Some matches little convo little to no dates = 5-6
Decent matches decent convo rate and some dates = 6-7
Good amount of matches and convo and perhaps 2 or more dates every week = 7-8
As many dates as you can handle off of the apps = 8
My rejection rate has always been 100%. I'm like a 2 on the face at best. $ an 8 easy, body 5, hardware 7 maybe and height right in the middle. Shows how important having a good mug is.
Yup.
whats hardwear
@@noway2835 Hydraulics.
@@animestarlord9021 You mean Large Hadron Collider?
@@RefalaStas Something like that, lol.
Face 6
Height 5
Body 7
Money 6
P-length 7
IQ 4
I constantly deal with 4/10 and 5/10 and, sometimes, 6/10. Rarely 7/10. Never with 8 and 9.
I think this rating it's accurate.
Can I check out the P length?
@@thetruthisright6750 Yeah proof or it's small
if can't provide p proof pic pls deduct 5
Brutally honest with I.Q. Wheat Waffles is actually wrong about I.Q. Due to sample bias (women who go to university) lower I.Q. scores are actually advantageous.
Probably the most realistic SMV we will see in comments.
Some of those factors are heavily influenced by the region where you live in - average height varies (compare Netherlands for example to the Asian ones) and, of course, yearly income - in Eastern Europe where I come from, the average yearly salary is about 15 - 20 000 Euros per year, while in the Western Europe or the U.S., it is 3-times higher.
Edit - corrected a mistake - 15 - 20 000 Euros per year
For sure per Year 15 thousands in Eastern Europe then I can agree, You mentioned "per month.
@@econdude3811 for examples Serbs and Montenegros
@@guig2004 my bad, I meant per year.
@@Ghola36 i knew that as I from PL :)
I was gonna comment this exact same thing. I'm south american and here you can barely earn over US$10K annually and still be one on the top 20% of population haha.
Your height distribution at 3:10 is way off… 40% of men are not 6’+. It’s roughly 14.5% in the US and 10% globally.
On your scale someone could literally be an 8 in every other category and just because they are 5’8” they would be below a 6.
He is disabled that's why
Yeah the height scale is far too harsh. It’s like a 2 inch difference from average height will not throw you down 2 whole points automatically. Thats ridiculous. Also I don’t know where he got 5’11 from
@@РоссийскаяФедерация-б4я maybe the data was taken in some eastern or northern european country where the average height is actually 5'11 (Norway or Serbia, for example). or the data was taken from a usa state like wyoming or utah that is 5'11 bc they have a lot of north european ancestry.
more likely though, he is citing self-reported height data.
nvm it is from the u.s, probably self reported data
also the huge amount of 6' ppl compared to 6'1 or 5'11 suggests its self reported, ppl wanna be 6' ore above
Man I absolutely love wheat. Most honest unbiased TH-camr in the space. Very mature and wise for his age aswell
I cant imagine how exhausting it must be to care so much about how others perceive you, honestly.
It's not easy being a man.
It’s just for fun like asking a girl to rate you or a”tbh”
@@Pedant_Patrol This problem isnt necessarily exclusive to men. I suppose this could just be a human tendency, and I used to be this way as well (and I still am, just to a lesser extent now, I am who I am and I dont give a shit how others perceive me now) but women also suffer tremendously from this (how they dress may effect how men treat them, aspects of the beauty industry + it capitalizing off the insecurities of women, etc)
@@Pedant_Patrol In this case they are the same. Being judged by physical standards alone by the outside world. Gender has nothing to do with it
You have to live in the world.
no way people take this seriously
But it still nice to pretend
You must be above a 7 or else you would take it seriously too
was really hoping to see april 1st on the release date of this vid lmao.
@@Movement_Pill nah
I think you are spot on most time. Face rating is pretty accurate
Smv is very subjective. Because of some people prioritize different factors higher or lower then other.
I am Asian 5 8” but for the girl I date ( Asian ) they are 5- 5’ 2” I am above average for guys they meet.
All my pass girlfriend are 8 and above. Looks.
Great video
Can you distinguish between her real rating and your thirst? Observing people online, men have very low standards when it comes to women. They call 6s 9, and 7s 10.
@@edheldude fax
she probably was an "8" for looks coz you were with her for some time, women become attractive as you get ot know them by first glance tho i doubt shes an 8 by a stranger
@@chaska8144 Really? For most women it's the opposite for me. I find a lot of women to be attractive, but when I get to know them more I get less attracted to them. lol
@@redpillsatori3020 im not saying its for all women bruh. alot of ugly women become attraactive as u get to know them however some become more unattractive and same applies to attractive women personality has an effect
In my opinion, this video is very useful 10/10
For anyone that wants to know how to find geometric average, using a windows calculator (make sure it the scientific setting), input the total you get for 'score^weight' (The number you'd get where the 83,980,800,000 is) then press '2nd' near the top left, press the 'yrootx' key. Finally, type in the weight total, 15 then press '='
you can also just take that number and put it to the power of (1/15), it's the same as 15th square root
He was afraid to reveal his "p" score..I'm guessing he didn't score to well there...😂😂
You made a huge mistake in reasoning at 12:39. Once you take geometric average, percentiles do not work the same. For example: You can only get 8 IF all scores are 8 across the board. And that is much more rare than top 1%, more like top 0.01%. A 7 across the board is also much more rare than top 10%.
You’re right, getting straight 8s is almost impossible thus making top 1% in the system impossible
@@WheatWaffles RIght, but then it is not top 1% if it is impossible, is it? :) I think this part of your video needs a bit more perfecting.
1st man made this exact same point - If you are 6 across the board, then you are an 8.
@@WheatWaffles Also, you forgot to include game / social skills. It is very important, rate it at least with a weight of 3 or 4. I am painfully shy and this is why I never get laid.
@@WheatWaffles yeah, you also forgot to include social skills and status, which are very important factors in smv as well
@@harsh3948 read the description
I’m 6’2 and 215 pounds at 38 years old. According to the charts I’m considered overweight still. But it doesn’t account for the fact I’m naturally a big guy. I’ve always had big arms and broad shoulders without lifting a finger to get it. Luckily I haven’t gotten the middle age belly and I have all my hair. I get more interest from women now than I did in my 20s 🤷🏼♂️. I’m always getting smiles, hi’s, and they seem to always want to touch me when they are talking. To bad I’m not interested in them anymore. Haven’t been with a woman in 3 years now. Monk mode. I don’t mind them being nice to me but that’s as far as it goes
Why you monk mode now if you getting girls attention at 38 years old. And how did you look in your late 20s to not get attention from girls? I’m 29 and I get more attention from women than I ever did in my late teens and early 20s
@@theworldisimmense I’m monk mode because I choose to be. I’m not pulling a knife out of my back ever again. I was good looking in my 20s and got all kinds of attention but I was young and stupid. I got burned a few times when I shouldn’t have. But I look more mature now so maybe that’s what the more attention is about. Apparently when men maintain a good figure in their 30s they are more attractive than they were in 20s they say 🤷🏼♂️
One day you will find out. Just because you can easily get women doesn’t mean it’s good for you
Probably because you're a manly-man and women, first and foremost, want safety, security, and resources, and a man like you hits those for them.
@@theworldisimmense
I am 18 years old, I rarely get it.
Yeah that’s cap. If you were at all attractive or got attention from girls you wouldn’t be watching these sad videos that attract ugly, loser guys. These videos are literally just a way to cope for the guys who get 0 female attention.
Now that this video has been made it would be great to see a WW video on how to rate a womans SMV taking into account everything. Such as, age, fitness, body count, kids, ect.
Came here for this.
Good idea, accept many men are poor. In the West, that means some Men will take just about any Woman they can get their hands on for sex and maybe even keep her if she has an average amount of resources and is good in bed, completely negating her actual SMV. This sounds drastic but I literally see it everyday.
I think its a pretty good calculation although I dont think the height section is accurate, I think after 6'2-6'3 height you start to get diminishing returns for height, I dont think someone who is 6'6 really has that big of an advantage over someone who is 6'2, other than that everything else seems pretty solid
You are completely wrong and have no idea look at photos between 6’1 and 6’5 and imagine you are a girl and had to pick
@@yousef3375 bro not exactly true have you ever been with a girl with over a foot height difference, it is not ideal everything is slightly awkward, 6’2 is the height that appeals to the largest demographic of girls because 5’2 girls wont be too awkward and 6ft girls are still comfortable too, a 6’5 guy girls that are 5’2 and below are just a bit awkward for couple shit like holding hands, kissing, etc, it is still doable of corse but what im saying is there is no real advantage a 6’5-6 guy has over a 6’2-3 guy when it comes to the broad spectrum of dating options, of corse they have an advantage over 6ft+ women but that is such a small percentage of the entire population of woman. In general terms which is what is video is about its about averages and statistics, there wouldn’t be much if any advantage to purely dating past 6’2-3
@@thesciencer1I agreed with u, I think the best height is 6’2 1 feet higher or lower. Far from that is worse
@@yousef3375not really
@@thesciencer1in c, would be between 184cm and 192cm that is the perfect height, taller could turn into a nightmare if u date a 170 cmshorter girl
SMV should include social proof.
I've noticed, when I'm alone I'm pretty much invisible. But when I'm with a girl suddenly other girls start checking me out.
Company of a pretty woman gives at least couple of extra SMV point. This is why women often chase married men.
It's an Accurate rating system for western countries Only. And its the same criticism i would give for your Channel overall. Everything you say 100% accurate for western countries but there are large cultural and economic conditions in other countries that would give higher value to wealth. In Latin America for example there are no social programs and living wages for low status jobs. The degrees of wealth are definitely more visible you have extream wealth and poverty. In West countries women can remain single and chace Chads and still live a retively comfortable life. I would rate Wealth on par with face looks in Latin America
@Kyler M
Looks better. the height of the body and so on does not matter at all. I get fucked up because of my face. The nose is a big minus. The face plays a role.
Face: 4
Height: 6
Body: 5
Money: 3
P-size: 4
IQ: 5
= 3,87 SMV
It's accurate. I always rated myself as a 4-5/10. 27 right now, had only 1 girlfriend in my life and never had casual sex. I'm like invisible. Very rare there are 3/10 women interested in me.
Similar issue
Yep, your exprience with women or the lack of will correlate with these ratings.
I have calculated my maximum. Body and money I could change. If I do so, I would become a 4.5 😂
It’s out of 8 not 10, you cant get a 10 with this calculation
I think the race adjustment could be improved. First off, adding SMV points for being white only applies to women for whom whiteness is an advantage (specifically Latina/Asian women). Otherwise, it makes more sense to keep White as neutral (add zero), whilst subtracting points for less advantageous ethnicities. Also, "Asian" is too broad a category. We know for a fact that being east Asian (Korean/Chinese/Japanese) is generally more advantageous than being south east Asian (Cambodian, Vietnamese, etc.), so the disparity must be accounted for. With the advent of Korean pretty boys like BTS, I'd even argue that East Asians have been slowly ascending the SMV ladder past Indians.
Everybody is above Indians
@@SK-kh2rs have you seen how much they earn highest earners in the states
@@SK-kh2rs as an Indian, yep that's true
@@SK-kh2rstotally right, everybody is above em
Feel like I just went through a math lesson. You are a very bright individual
Money score should be adjusted according to location: eg. you do online work and make $60K a year income while living in the US = average, the same $60K a year living in Colombia = high upper class.
I think I’m the only woman who watches all your videos. I just love the amount of effort and technicality that goes behind his reasonings. WW quantifies the things most guys know or will find out about dating.
In your opinion, do you think he's right about most things?
@@john.10347 I'm also woman watching his videos but he forgot about charisma, some men have it and can be small or ugly
@@salvajegata2222 Would you date a man who's into black pill? Most women I know say it's anti-women. However, I think that statement is from a misunderstanding of black pill. Considering you watch WW, would you?
@@salvajegata2222 you watch his videos and don't know about halo effect?
oh my god its a girl
Funny, my score matched your final result perfectly. Just shows you can have a lot of good things going for your but if your face isn’t above average and you’re in the west, not good 😂
This is going to be a weird one to show some of the redpill guys online 😅
that's why IQ and $ have nothing to do with SMV, they are useless
What if your face is good but height and body is crap. Still the same so this system is a good assessment.
Hi @wheatwaffles! :).. I'm a woman with some experience in dating... And I believe there's one really important variable you're not taking in account to calculate SMV in Men... And for me at least was one of the most important when considering dating and not lose interest in a particular guy.... I would call it "Touch"...i've dated some guys that while they were way above average in looks, appearance, status, etc.. Just didn't know how to touch a woman the right way, and they couldn't please me even when I tried to teach them.... Then again there were other guys that weren't as attractive but were extremely talented with "touch" and that just made me want them so much more.... BTW loving your videos debunking dating into numbers.. Keep the good job🙂👏👌
While what you're saying is valid, I think this video is more for guys who can't even get woman to go out with them. They need to hit these markers before you would even get to the "touch" phase.
If Chad touches you, you feel butterflies. If a sub-5 touches you, it's a sexual assault charge.
Really?! No woman wants to be touched by unattractive man ever!
@@nightrider9596 well you don't want to just get her... if you want to see her again and keep her interested "touch" is important... More than looks (face and physic)... At least for me... Of course everyone is different... 🙃
@@condessaana7312 you don't want to be touched by ugly guys neither though
Anyone that takes this seriously is immediately a 0. This is pathetic
Cope
Smh when I'm only a 3.578 using an internet autism warrior's math formula 😮💨
The moment you leave the College you go from a 6.7 to a 5.2. I'd need more reasoning here.
It's because in college you in a area with an abundance a women of within your age range. Making it easier to find a relationship.
@@ifechimichael6006
I agree with the general premise, but I do think that the drop off is too severe. I think that part of the calculation needs to be reworked a bit.
I believe the drop off is that severe, I spent a bit of time thinking this through before outlining in the video. Trust me being in college is wayyy easier than not being, it is the only place I consistently see low tier normies in with a chance. In all other places, low tier normies are invisible
@@WheatWaffles hey shouldn't you go even with your way? When you are a white dude in a college in the west because:
white +0.5
college +0.5
the west -1
and i would definitely debate the math behind S. America and the west. The west in my opinion would only nock of 0.5 points and S. America adds nothing.
@@WheatWaffles yeah but you’re rating system penalises everyone for not currently being in uni (in the western world) but 1.5 points, even chads? I don’t believe this is at all accurate
i disagree with the height part like if you're an 8 but 6 foot (5.5) the overall score will go lower even if its only one point or less its still make a different, again being 6 ft 8 or even 7 ft is putting you in a nich market and again you will have less appeal to a lot of girls so yeah i think being 6 ft 2 is 8 and not 6.5 and adding few inches to that put you in a niche market and make you lose points
@@MakinItHappenn i don't really care about wheat heigh or even his face rating if someone is teaching you a message look at the message not the messenger
and i really agree with you about the short girl stuff
I think the physical attributes you use are mostly good, though style and grooming are also important too. I also wouldn't rate height as more important than body. And penis length isn't really important in practice bc by the time someone knows it, it no longer matters.
Money and iq don't really matter for smv imo. Lifestyle, status, and personality/game are much more important. But you can't easily quantify those of course
P-length one threw me off too, and I think IQ should be weighted more (considering that having a high IQ helps you "jester-maxx", earn more, dominate other males intellectually, etc..), but you are wrong on the height thing--height is SUPER important. Ask any short guy. I'm 6'1" tall and I know it mostly due to my height that I was able to get laid on occasion in my 20s.
@@redpillsatori3020
It's not true I'm a 6'3.6 ft (192cm) face better. I would like to be lower but have a face. 180 cm is the ideal height above the bust it is not needed. Women always say they don't like the face and see you later.
IQ and p length doesn't matter at all don't know whats up with that
@@redpillsatori3020 I wasn't saying height isn't important. It is very important. Just less than body. A jacked short guy > an obese tall guy
hey wheat waffles im a very very tall person i struggle a lot w girls. ive never given a kiss to a girl and im 30+. i think you overestimated height just like tails. ive never goten a compliment for my height its like face halos everything face = smv
@@MakinItHappenn i really dont now what to do. im in that elongated face section. ww gave me a 4.5/10 (closer to 5) and nero a 5.25/10. he said i needed muscle but ive been going to the gym for over 5 years and i still look almost the same. its very frustrating. since people say i should be getting girls but girls dont even think i exist. its like im invisible to them. id rather be 5.5 then my current height if it would give me even a point in face
So I bought wheat waffles face rating and I’m 4 added to the fact that I’m over 300 pounds at 5’11 made Gave me a 4 after all calcs. Harsh but definitely helpful since my money Iq and p length was decently rated. This lets me know what I’ve always known. Soon as I lose weight I’ll be where I need to be. Cheers to black pill for the reality check
Money IQ and P length aren't even known to the woman until after you've had sex or even later
How tf are u 5'11 and 300+ pounds? 💀
just be white bro
From personal experience Height compensates hard. I am six feet which is top 1% in my country. (South East Asia) I am about a 7 at best. Good Hunter Eyes paired with average all else. Most girls often complimented my height above everything.
I also had a classmate who is 5'11 who was the third tallest in the class. He had terrible recession, crooked teeth, long midface and bug eyes. About a 4 at best. What was shocking was that he used to get girls with his height alone. Even today I saw some girls commenting that he is model tier handsome.
It could be possible that in my culture Height trumps face. And from my personal experience. All the guys girl were crazy about in my highschool were notably tall (Top 5%).
Yeah I wondered if face was overweighted and height underweighted in the geometric mean computation.
I think so too. Many girls have a height fetish. I would actually call it a fetish of some kind.
Which country
Height should have been weighted 5 and face 3
Time to move to S.E.A.
no disrespect but this calculation doesn't work since some one like jeremy meeks would be a 6.62 and lets be honest he is not under a 7
Dude this is one of your best vids, I'll jump right in and see what I get and if it correlates with my dating experiences. Well done mate 👌🏼
Tbh one thing that should get added is "EQ". I'd argue that having an outgoing, charming personality is up there with stuff like IQ. If this were the case my score would go down so much.
You already got this wrong on the very first metric. It’s been shown in studies women start to think guys are less attractive after 6’ 2” - 6’ 3” it doesn’t continue to linearly go up in score equivalent to total height. Otherwise Boban would be an 8 in height and chicks aren’t trying to date a guy that’s 7’ 5”
This is completely false. 6'5 is the line.
I heard there was a study that 6’2” is the perfect height according to girls, so shouldn’t that be given the 8 score? And as the man gets taller he actually loses slight SMV points in height
in my experience ur right i would give 5 inches for points in face
show me the link to the study.
Love your work waffles. Height destroyed me!!🤦🏿♂️. I knew height would crush me, but dang😫. I am doing good in every area (except height), fantastic in one, but the height pill still wins again🙃. I believe this just proves again what you were saying about having average scores across the board being better than killing it at some and at the very bottom of others. My score was scary low, but I still think your method is correct.
How tall are you?
@@zimasajam I got a 1 on height to put it simply
if your doing fantastic in the P department you should be slayiing these hoes
@@nolungs8652 I am! But you have to get pass the barrier to entry first🤦🏿♂️I. Never get to showing off because my height stops all attempts before I get to show them where I am blessed at.
@@coreyjeter2893 just show your PP on certain apps maybe some grey pants buldge action since your PP to leg ratio will probably look crazy haha
I’d say this seems fairly legit. It puts me just over a 6.5. My face is only a 5 because I have little lower jaw and chin projection and my eye area is mid because of lack of skeletal support and slightly saggy looking upper eyelids with a slightly negative canthial tilt. The rest of my face is quite attractive (eyebrow geometry, eyelashes, eye shape and colour, maxilla width, decent nose) My wealth is slightly above average for my age group but not significantly (making 60k per year in a smaller town) , iq is quite high, body fat low, p length high (90% or better) and what really saves me is my height of 6 4” / 6 5” (99%). I think it’s fair that my facial flaws sink me quite a bit but I have almost everything else going for me or not holding me back and have about the amount of female attention a 6.5 in theory should receive. (A couple of new girls added on Snapchat from tinder per week, most of the girls ranging between 3 and 6.) the one thing I might add is that penis size may matter slightly more if it was something known about prior to engaging with women considering a bad penis makes you smv much lower even if having a big one can’t save an ugly guy.
Having a big one can’t save an ugly guy? Pete Davidson would like to have a word…
Why you can add +0.5 points when on a university/college campus ?
I don't get it either
I get the general idea of this but it definitely has it's problems, first of all height is not a linear progression of scoring, if you are above 6 feet you will never have problems with height, I am 6'1 and I have never had a girl tell me I'm too short, above 6'2 there is no gain and the difference between 6'0 and 6'2 is negligible, it does however change depending on the height of your friends, if you have 1 inch on all of your friends as the gang comes in it can make a difference. Under 6 feet there is a big drop off, mainly because the number sounds good but also 6'0 is the first perceivably tall height, below 5'10 your height will become a problem and a big one for a lot of women, the difference between the lower heights is also negligible, doesn't matter if you're 5'4 or 5'7 you're still short. I feel like you've done body reasonably well but shape is more important that leanness, as long as you don't have a fatty face because of excess weight. It is way more important to a girl that she feels protected than she have a 6 pack to run her hand over, but of course height has a role in that as well. Finance is more lifestyle than actual finance, a girl really doesn't give a fuck if you're 100k in debt and being a retard with your money in the sexual market place, in a relationship setting it may matter, but a guy with no debt driving a shit box is the same as a guy in student debts driving a shit box, money is more about perception of money in the sexual marketplace. Penis size I don't believe has any impact at all on smv unless if you're going around telling people your size or if someone you've been with have told a load of people, she will not know your size until you've gotten her into bed. IQ is a good one that a lot of people miss out so well done for including it, women do value intelligence, but they value it more in a sense of competency than straight up intelligence, competency as a rating is far more valuable, a girl needs to trust that if she has a problem she can come to you and you are competent enough to get it sorted for her. There are two huge things that I believe you have missed however, one is social hierarchy/ dominance I know a guy who had a near perfect face, guy could have been a model, but he got no girls because if anyone ever challenged him in any way he crumbled, he truly let people walk all over him, he would walk into a party and 3 girls would start staring at him, any random dude would come over say hello to a girl he was talking to and he would just crumble and girls notice things like that. The other one is emotional intelligence and knowledge of female psychology, 90 percent of men don't know that women do not think like men, most men simply do not know what women are after and what makes a woman think about you, there is an extreme bump in smv to any guy who knows how to make a woman feel like a fucking Disney princess, make her feel like what she imagined love was like when she was a kid, make her feel that excitement of her first bf, that is massive. However for this last point you need to have enough smv for a girl to agree to going on a date with you, that's often the hard bit.
My SMV will be significantly higher in a few years. I am working on all of it.
How do you work on the P-value?
@@anon2034 I am working on everything I can change of course. There are suposedly efective methods to increase p size, girth and length, but I havent tried them and dont need them.
@@anon2034 jelqing
Bravo. You have put a lot of work into this. Maybe, it needs refinements and adjustments but it seems pretty solid. I always thought about creating an equation to rate SMV, but you have done it. Congratulations.
Only thing lower than my GPA is my SMV
I think the height rating is not correct. Taller is not automatically better because it would mean that a guy who is 220 cm is more attractive (height-wise) than a guy who is 185 cm. Most normal sized women will probably prefer the 185 cm guy. The 220 cm guy will definitely get more attention but that is not necessarily SMV-related attention. Height attractiveness is a curve with a peak somewhere between 178 and 192 cm in Western countries.
Y’all know that like women are not adhering to or endorsing these standards right? This idea entirely exists within this community. It is assigning value to each characteristic differently than is truly reflected by the opinions of the general population, on top of falsely assuming everyone has the same preferences. It also completely leaves out personality traits, which are a bigger factor in what women find attractive. Whatever number you end up with at the end of this just tells you how other men who buy into this system and their perceived value of these characteristics think about you, not women or even the average person regardless of sex/gender.
Wheatwaffles just mathematically proved white privilege
An interesting concept, drives home the point that you should focus on improving your weakest attributes if at all possible.
I have to query the ratings somewhat though:
I don't think being at College matters one jot, certainly didn't change the amount of attention I would get from women when I graduated. There are just more women at college, your rating doesn't change, graduates can go to bars frequented by college students just fine - it's what I did for years.
P-size is also very over-weighted here, I'm not sure if it really matters at all. When you are dressed, it will be impossible to tell the difference between a man having a 5" or 7" erect length. If you can't notice the difference until you're in the bedroom, it doesn't effect your ability to attract a women in the first place. In the bedroom itself, it's only one component of sexual performance, albeit an fairly important one.
If it belongs on this chart at all, then it should be given a weighting of 1. But in reality, I don't think women care if you're around the average. Remove points for
the penis length is probably because the rating is for sexual market value. meaning, your attractiveness to being a sexual partner. if you're about to have sex because you were attractive enough to get a girl to a bed but your dick is small as fuck, she's probably not going to fuck with you. hence, a smaller penis size lowers your overall smv.
College matters because it is the single place where most of the attractive girls are open to cold/warm approaches
@@harsh3948 he is talking about college degree won't help him on dating at all cause nowadays in 2022 women can make their own money too and have their own education.
@@yyysamuel3215 but they’re still hypergamous
P size was the dumbest measure point from this video. Do he know any women who truly thinks 18cm is a good P size? That's just the other extreme of the P size, and it hurts or intimidates most woman. Because he lives in England me may not know stories of those types of people with woman.
I think there are some crucial variables left out like status and game/social skills
People are going to lie to themselves about their social skills and game
@@thetruthisright6750 ..yeah, and lie about IQ, like WW said. I know my social skills and game sucks horribly--I'm probably a 1 in both, but having a decent face and being 6'1" tall helped me a lot.
Face 4
Height 3
Body 6
Money 7
P length 6
IQ 7
Got 3.7 because I live in West (out of Uni) and Brown 😭 Pretty accurate though, I thought my SMV was around 4 without the calculation.
I did this for my boyfriend and he got 3'75. 🤣😅
welcome to the club. got 3.62, same as you : brown guy living in Europe. lost 2 solid points but it's pretty accurate regarding my score in Tinder and to how girls respond to me.
There are several misconceptions here:
1. taller is not better
2. leaner is not better
3. bigger is not better
For each point there is an optimal range.
The evaluation of the body is also far too superficial. Here it depends decisively on proportions. At the end, one could make a separate video series on the subject.
Without money, nothing else will save you.
all this for women 💀
Great video, I think that I found a easier method for the formula :
You can take your score in every single field and multiply it by the wheight of that particular field and add all up and in the end you divide by 15 (the sum of all wheight).
Ex:
Face : 6
Height : 5
Body : 6
Money : 5
PP : 7
Iq : 6
(6x5)+(5x3)+(6x2)+(5x2)+(7x2)+6
= 87
87 ÷15 = 5.8
It's a little less accurate but easier
I used your system because I couldn't figure out how he turned 87,000,000,000 into a number less than 10 by dividing it by 15.
@@SUPEREVIL6668 not dividing by 15, more of 15th root.
It still makes no sense to me at all. I wish he explained how he got 5.38 in the video.
@@SUPEREVIL6668 do it liek this :
let google do the math : grab your numbers like this (2 steps)
first step ---> face^5 * hight^3 * body^2 * money^2 * dick^2 * inteligence^1 = big-number
second step ---> big-number^(1/15) = final value
8/10 face = 8^5 = 32768 points. 10/10 height = 10^3 = 1000 points. Perfect height is only 3,5% the value of a perfect face according to Wheat Waffles SMV calculation
Remember that personality can play big factor in your realistic success rate. From personal experience, having the ability to be an entertaining conversationalist and having confidence can certainly add 0.5 to 1 point to your score.
There's a Guru for everything... I think this guy is 100% guru for love.
I'm glad wheat Waffles finally addressed Indian and Asian race have lower smv in western countries. Its hard facts I came to accept ages ago.
In your profile pic you look buff and Chad I think you can escape it with white women
@@yousef3375 Lol, I'm 5"8 bro
@@Swiminator_08 get some lifts it changed a lot
@@yousef3375 shoes?
I’m 5’9 I have a great face and very muscular, I’ve been turned down once by a female off of a dating app because of my height, funny thing she was short and kinda fat, with a nice face, I’ve never been turned down or told I got a boyfriend, I’ve taken out almost every female I’ve approached ! Height is not the be all end all! Complete nonsense! If your face is good and you’re taller than who you approach, there won’t be any issues at all!
I'm 5'11.5 never in my life have I been called short
@@dae1925 exactly! I was literally 1 time, and honestly I think she knew the second she saw me there was no way I would take her seriously, she knew her value compared to mine, in fact most women I’ve been with threw themselves at me! I even had a situation where my tall lanky blonde haired friend probably about 6’2” did modeling for a jeans company, had women choose me in the friend group! So height may be important to some females, but it’s definitely no a deciding factor when the 5’9 guy 5’10 in shoes has a good face and body! Sorry just not buying it! I’ve lived it
@@jsav4269 yes as long as you have average height / it change not so much your rating between 5'10 and 6'2 because a 6'2 average face will be less succesful than a 5'10 with good face
Use this like as an “it’s ovER” button
Hey dude, can I also get my p-length rated by sending you a picture for 5$?
💀💀💀
This is one of the best videos you ever made.
"Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense. No one thinks he needs more of it than he already has." - Rene Descartes
You not a 6 wheat no offense. Also why do you add 0.5 points for being in college did I miss something I'm confused.
The height chart made this whole video lose its credibility because the taller you are doesnt make you more attractive especially when above 6'4". In an ideal world women prefer 6-6'4 as the peak (8 points) then you should reduce the points the further away you get from that peak range from both ends.
Interesting content as usual, but the height component is a bit off. The difference between 5'11 and 6'2 is not the same as the difference between 5'11 and 5'8.
Also, I don't think being average height affects SMV. But according to this system a chad or chadlite would have their scored lowered for being 5'11. I don't agree.
I took the Hubbard IQ test at UT Austin and got a 133, I have a Master degree in chemistry: Jordan Peterson says that to do well in this major you need a 130 IQ minimum, but I still put 120 IQ
3:37 where did you get that chart and data? I can’t seem to find it doing a reverse image search. Also, how is 6 ft 6 or above only an 8? Wouldn’t that be a 10, since it is the ideal height and top 1% height? Another point, how is 5 ft 11 average height in males 18-30 in the U.S? I searched the web and it seems that 5 ft 9 is average.