Here's for the guys who can't analyze data :

This is only considering physical attractiveness as selection trait. On average, men are not physically attractive to begin with (also because women are not as visually stimulated as men). On the other hand, the average woman is already attractive to men. So when you ask women to choose men solely based on attractiveness, it is completely normal to see this data pop up. If you think looks are going to get you the results you want, you're mistaken. Looks only get your foot in the door. If you don't have the skills to seduce and frame, you will fail (unless you're looking for mediocre drunk sex). On the other hand, if you do have the proper frame, you will realize that you don't need looks to get your results. We all know someone who isn't particularly attractive, yet who is amazing with women. What lifting is going to get you is confidence, alpha traits, and respect from other men, but it is not going to be the cure-all to your dry spell if you haven't put in the work into game.

So you're saying there's a chance

From the article:

The reason for this gender disparity is probably not that women are more appearance-focused than men. The most likely explanation is that women, who are generally less likely to initiate contact, have a higher threshold when they do so. For many women, though certainly not all, if they are going to break with gender norms, it is only going to be for a really attractive guy.

This is bullshit, because this is "likes", not initiation.

The real factors are that women only go for top top men when they want casual sex. Partly because they're hypergamous (got to have the best), partly because they can afford this strategy (the demand for casual sex is much much higher on the male side).

The result is that Men will click like on all women they're prepared to fuck. Women click on top men because they can, and they still get hard dick. The effort is negative for women (validation and dates paid for), while the cost is much higher for men (texting, saying the right thing, paying for dates if you're stupid, rejection).

So our mediocre HB6 girl clicks on Chads until she gets fucked, while Billy Beta has to click through hundreds of girls to hope to get a response.

What is your definition of top?

We see this pattern all the time. It's called the Matthew principle. In cases of meritocracy, the square root of the total population accrues half of the reward. In this case it is likes, in others it is wealth. Work hard to be top 10% in every thing you do.

I think it’s interesting that top 11-50% do get nearly 40% of likes. With deviation from sampling I think it’s fair to say this group is represented fairly. So as long as you’re top 50%(not hard considering how fucking lazy most people are) you’ll do fine, if you’re top 10% you’ll slay, and if you’re in that bottom 50% you need to hit the gym or else you’re fucked.

Why does this surprise anybody? It shouldn't. Just like you aren't out there looking every ugly chick either. Fix your camp if you want different results

The only difference is they are liking if they want to fuck them or not. Men will fuck 60% of women, women will fuck 5% of men. It's pretty straight forward. If you look at shit like instagram, it's the EXACT FUCKING SAME FOR WOMEN. The top 1% of instagram women will have likely 50+% of all instagram likes. In fact, if you look at a typical 6/10 female vs a crazy popular instagram 'model' (lol), these women are receiving several thousand likes for every 1. If anything, it's more extreme for men. You're just comparing apples to oranges.

[deleted]

The information is interesting, but without knowing the total population you don't know how to interpret this, though the direction is obvious.

For example, let's say a girl who is a 4 looks through 100 men. She'll probably like 40 of them since she is obviously below average and has a lower standard, where as a 7 could see herself as a 9 and only likes 5 dudes living under the misguided notion that she could pick up a dude at a bar easy enough.

So with just 2 girls we have 45 likes on 100 men out of 200 possible likes and 10 likes in the top 5%. So you'd say the top 5% get 22%, but it doesn't translate to probability in the same way. Normalizing it helps, but without knowing the ranked population of the girls the lower tiers could be inflated by lower tier girls.

Put another way, top 1% gets liked by 100% of the girls, but a 48% dude gets liked by 1% of girls and those are probably all lower than 50% with 0% at even his relative level. You'd need to stratify this a lot more to get a sense of what it's like to be on tinder.

Say you're a 6, you probably get 0 10's, 0 9's, 0 8's, 1 7, 2 6's, 5 5's and 25 4's and below. So depending on how you approach this, you'd have 4 or so matches in the 33 girls that liked you, but at the same time only get 1 match out of the 100+ likes.

There's probably a math or stat major who could break this down better. Either way, dating apps are not kind.

I'm probably gonna get blasted by incels for posting in this thread. But whats the issue here?

The sexual marketplace isnt the word you are looking for, instead you are looking at the casual-sex marketplace, which is what Tinder is, and the other appears to be.

No woman goes to Tinder hoping for a long and meaningful relationship, she goes there when she wants some free food, maybe a place to sleep, and some dick.
Maybe its not moral, but thats the kind of woman you are getting, when you as a man, sign up for tinder. If you want something more, don't use the casual-sex apps.

That said, getting away from Tinder, you still have those women, and even on more regular dating sites and services (like Its Just Lunch, which I'm a fan of) woman still have vetopower on every meetup. So do the men, but they are far less likely to use it (I am assuming here, but I figure its a reasonable assumption)

The problem isn't that the women are being "Too picky" its that your visuals, and a spruced up bio are all she has to go on. If I know nothing about you other than a bio that you spent a week writing and refining, and a selfie taken with ur last girlfriend, I'm not going to be interested unless you are absurdly attractive. Even a 7/10 or 8/10 doesn't stand a chance there.

Then again, I don't do casual-sex apps, and as a successful, business-focused woman, I don't care for unattractive, unmotivated Billy Betas who still live with their parents.

Didn’t know what hinge was, so I looked it up. Premise was that it hooks people up with mutual friends of your Facebook friends....yeahhh fuck that. I’m not trying to get my squeaky clean reputation fucked with. Back to tinder I go!

This distribution is very common with modern society and media. It's called the Long Tail Short Head distribution.

LOL, Chad has done it again!

This is black pill bruh. Not sure how "Red Pill" truth.

Man dating has become a crazy game. I’ve been successful at it but it takes a ton of effort.

Pictures on point. Looks on point. Clothes on point. Body on point. Hair on point. Game on point. Texting on point. Hobbies on point.

The list goes on and on. It’s maddening how choosy women are these days.

Interesting study for sure.

Actionable advice for everyone - look how much better the top percentile of men does than the average man. Don't envy those men, become one of them. Go lift. Educate yourself. Groom yourself well. Be a badass.

[deleted]

So stop being the bottom of the barrel bucko and sort yourself out

80-20 Peano distribution

I think you mean Pareto distribution

You are either her cock, wallet, or handkerchief. Even if you have what it takes to be 'Mr right' and be all 3, dont.

Confirming this from OkCupid:

Women rated an incredible 80% of men as below median.

this is why men wind up paying for sex. who has time to go through all that BS?? if im trying to gift some eggnog its alot easier to just pay

From the headline alone, you can see that the author is grasping at the truth of the matter, but he can't quite get past his programming to accurately view reality. "These statistics show why it’s so hard to be an average man on dating apps"

Those last three words, "on dating apps" are crucial. The fact of the matter is that title should have excluded those last three words because the dating apps are actually a fairly good representation of the distribution in reality. Unrestrained female hypergamy, access to resources and employment, and no fault divorce mean that these statistics represent the actual reality that a typical man faces in the dating game, both approaching in regular life and online.

Restriction of female sexuality is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the development of advanced and stable societies.

My irl game is pretty solid. Seems much easier than tinder.

I'm not gonna put that much effort into some dumb app just so women can have a better overall quality of selection. They're entitled and have it easy enough already.

Getting professional pictures makes a big, big difference. If you're reasonably fit, have a decent face, and look your biological age or younger, professional photos can easily get you into the top 5%. I've seen it firsthand. A good buddy of mine went from getting no matches on Tinder, to getting many matches a week, simply by hiring a professional photographer.

[deleted]

The solution, (if seen as an issue):

1. Build something and yourself that is top 10% of men worthy.
2. Don't invest time in viewing the lives of the 10% until you emerge into that bracket.
3. Keep building.

This is only allowed to bother you if you've tried vigorously to achieve it. Otherwise, accept the data and get back to whatever you were doing that a top 10% man wouldn't be.

Men (like me) who don't take full advantage ought to be sentenced to punching ourselves in the dick daily until they have 3 plates, no excuses.

I posted a few months ago about how I suspected the SMP followed a power law, this confirms it. Thanks for taking the time to post this, refreshing to see data in this thread.

I would like to see these broken down further. So far top 10% of men get 58% of the likes. But 11% - 50% is a huge range for the other 37%. I bet if this follows a bell curve we see something VERY CLOSE to the 80/20 breakdown. Where if you are a guy between 20%-40% (still above average, probably solid bod, ok body, college educated) you are getting low level leftovers and if you are in the 50% median you get NOTHING.

Would love to see similar data for women.

How do you rate top % on a dating app anyway? Some guy could be a pro at making pictures, a high status job, nice car to show off, some other lifestyle extravagances that do especially well on a dating profiles album. Yet that same guy could be a out of shape short dude with a side of autism limiting his jerkboy potential charms in real life.

This brings us back to the point that men dominate in their preferred environments. You have the office alpha, the gym alpha and the school aplha, nowadays you have the social media alpha. But none of these guys are guaranteed to show dominance in another category. Some might have allot of things in common, like say the school environment and the gym environment. What makes you dominate in one category will help you along in the other. But in other areas one set of qualities far outweigh the other, say your top 1% social media guy. I'd say that being able to make nice pictures and having a showroom life far outweighs genetic virility and charm.

Yet we all know what type of dude women go for to get banged hard. This is the big problem I have with social media, it only matters if you chose to participate. And even though women do invest in it and chose to believe in it. Making it any more than an after thought for when you already dominate another market is foolish.

And dominating another market is hard.

What constitutes these various brackets according to this app?

Not bragging at all, but I consider myself top 10% with a 9/10 face, 8/10 body but am only 5’9.5 (fml...) & even I have trouble getting 8s+ on dating apps. I have good pictures but you can clearly see I’m not over 6 foot, which probably hinders my results. Thinking about buying some height increasing insoles specifically for pictures lmao.

I have a Chad friend who I asked to see & use his Tinder for a day & holy fuck it actually made me sick to my stomach how easy it was for him... this guy had solid HBB9s messaging him first talking dirty, he doesn’t have to do anything, every girl I swiped instantly messaged me right after. What I would do to be in his shoes man...