Striking the Right Balance between Appearance and Performance and Keeping the Distinction Clear
A provider's average appearance and performance scores are one of the first items on her profile that I see when I consider the possibility of booking a session with her for the first time. I believe that there may be trends and patterns in these scores that can inform and guide the selection process. I would appreciate your feedback on my anecdotal observations below and what if any strategies have worked best for you when using these average scores as a guideline for choosing providers.
It seems that the majority of providers (or at least the ones whose reviews I have been reading) have noticeably higher average scores in one area or the other. That gap between their two average scores is often small (typically less than 1 point, perhaps .5 or .75), but some have a more substantial gap of 1 point or more. A minority have appearance and performance scores that are so close to each other that the gap between them is negligible (perhaps .25 or so).
On one hand are those providers whose strength clearly lies in their performance. They might average say, 7 or 8 in appearance but 8 or 9 in performance. My experience with providers who fit this profile has been broadly consistent with that of other reviewers, although in a minority of these cases some of their reviewers were more generous in their appearance ratings than I would have been. Aside from the pervasive factor of personal taste, those minority of cases lead me to wonder if some of the reviewers' gave these providers a higher appearance rating because: those providers' strong performances made the providers seem more beautiful in those reviewers' minds; or they do not want to harm or offend a provider that they liked and might want to see again by giving her a lower appearance rating.
On the other hand are those providers whose strength clearly lies in their appearance. They might average say, 8 or 9 in appearance but only 7 or 8 in performance. My experience with providers who fit this profile has been that – IMHO - their performance has often been weaker than their good performance ratings would suggest. I have begun to wonder if some of the reviewers gave some of those providers good performance scores because; they just enjoyed the experience of doing a hot woman, rather than any actual skills that the provider demonstrated; the providers' beauty has a kryptonite-like or deer-in-the-headlights effect on the reviewers' minds; or they do not want to harm or offend a provider that they liked and might want to see again by giving her a lower performance rating.
If my above theories have any merit, then they might explain why there are usually not larger gaps between providers' average appearance and performance ratings or between the appearance and performance ratings that individual reviewers give them. For example, I have not seen many providers' profiles with glaring gaps of 2 points or more between their average appearance and performance ratings. At the individual level, I have noticed that most individual reviewers' performance and appearance ratings of a provider are usually no more than 2 or 3 points apart. Those less frequent reviews with larger gaps between the two scores are noteworthy and often make for interesting reading.
Out of those less frequent reviews with big gaps between appearance and performance ratings, I have seen many more negative reviews with high appearance ratings and low performance ratings – say, 8 to 10 for appearance and 2 to 5 for performance – than I have with low appearance ratings and high performance ratings - say, 2-5 for appearance and 8-10 for performance. I believe that this discrepancy exists because it is easier for an attractive provider to get away with weak service than it is for a plain provider to demonstrate strong skills, given the highly visual nature of what attracts most men.
If it was not obvious from the above, I weigh performance scores more heavily than appearance scores. The majority of my better experiences have been with providers with somewhat or significantly better performance ratings than appearance ratings. A minority of my better experiences have been with providers whose average appearance and performance ratings were so close that the gap between them was negligible. Most of my disappointing, mediocre, or lukewarm experiences have been with providers whose average appearance rating was noticeably higher than their average performance rating – even when those performance ratings were still quite good. It has reached the point that when I open the profile of a provider of potential interest and I see that her performance ratings are good but noticeably lower than her appearance ratings, I often lose interest and move on to the next candidate.
Has anyone else had similar experiences and reached similar conclusions, or is it just me and my taste?