Something like this is long overdue, should make it easier to see who the top providers are in each area when traveling. After reading the other thread about the Top 100 Reviewers I started thinking, who really cares, does anyone really come here to see who the top dudes are? I think I like the Top 100 Providers list much better.

I concur; it's just like reviewing batting averages and RBIs.

.  .  . and all of them have over 40 reviews. Looks like a provider has to have at least a certain number of reviews to qualify to be ranked. I wonder is TER lists the criteria somewhere.

The top 100 providers lists are very interesting, and a great addition to the site.  Every provider I have noticed on those lists has very recent reviews.  You would think there would be quite a few retired Hall of Famers in the lists, even accounting for those two got themselves delisted when they hung up the garter.  Does that also explain how, for example, Nikki Irish is inside the overall top 20, just outside the New York top 20, but not in the Washington Top 100?  Maybe her high ratings here keep her in the overall rankings but her paucity of recent Washington reviews prevents her from being eligible for the Washington list?  Svetlana has exactly 40 reviews and ratings high enough for the top 10...so will she jump in there with her next review?

So yeah, I'd like to see the criteria, but mostly just because I'm a curious geek like that.  Regardless, it is a great service and yet another thing to play with when I have insomnia.

Outside the US, where TER is not yet well established, there are ranked providers with single digit reviews.  Meanwhile, Nikki Avalon is ranked #1 in all cities but #15 in Vegas with the same stats.

Transparency would be nice.

-- Modified on 8/11/2010 12:35:56 AM

The list made me realize I might have been in this hobby a little too long.  I've seen well over 10% of the ladies on the list..LOL !

I like how the provider's performances are averaged togather.

In the result of the Escort Search, there is a combined rating of appearance and performance -- looks like an average of the two. It's nice to have but I would rather look at the two scores separately, as I don't look further if the appearance score is not high.

I think TER should average the scores like the diving and gymnastics judges do: Throw out the highest and the lowest scores, and then average the remaining scores.

-- Modified on 8/11/2010 8:22:37 PM

I think TER should average the scores like the diving and gymnastics judges do: Throw out the highest score and the lowest score, and then average the remaining scores.

How reliable can this new TER feature be if the #1 ranked reviewer in DC had a 6/7 as her next to most recent review?   Wouldn't that be enough to knock someone off the top of the list?

After thinking about this feature a bit, I think the ranking skews in favor of established providers. There are many younger or newer providers who have excellent reviews. If the scores of a provider is consistently high then you wouldn't need 20, 40 reviews to ranked highly.

If the standard deviation is used as one criterion, then providers with few reviews would make the list if their scores are consistently high.

If a lady has 69 reviewers who say she is on average a 9.2, then one reviewer with 5 reviews comes along and says no, she is just a 6, all the other reviewers are wrong. If that one guy was enough to 'knock her off the top of the list' that in itself would make the system very unreliable.  The ladies individual rankings are simply an average of what the reviewers had to say, if she begins to get consistently lower numbers then her average would fall, as well it should.  But not from one single lower score... that would not make 'common sense'.

I think they are both equally pretty interesting to look at for a lot of reasons. But I actually look at the top reviewers more.

No.........

figured out the criteria for selection. There does not seem to be a hiarchay. It is not by # of reviews that I can see and it is not bu average score. Has anyone figured out the sriteria for the area top 100?

XXOOXX,
Apple
Your Bangkok Fantasy

If you look closely I think you will see it is based on the Combined average score. There seems to be a minimum number of reviews required to be on the list, but not sure what that is.

Instead of trying to figure out by ourselves, TER should post their criteria for, and method of computing, the ranks.

At this moment, the list is interesting but has no practical use for me. I already know who the few top-ranked providers are in the area. Not too much farther down the list, the score becomes average. Besides, the list misses the newer and highly rated providers like you and other highly rated touring ladies.

I agree that the list looks better. It will make it make an easy pick a top notch provider.

Now you have many ladies in the top 100 with only 5 reviews?  Yesterday the lady with the lowest was about 43. I really don't think a lady brand new who starts off with 5 great reviews should be ranked as high as or higher than a lady who has been around awhile and earned her rank over a larger number of reviews. Seems there should be a minimum or factor in the number of reviews into the ranking.

Perhaps 5 is too small a number, 10 would be better.

As I mentioned earlier, if they use standard deviation as a criterion, where the lower its value the more reliable the average score is, the ranking would favor providers with a large number of reviews and to those with consistent scores. Take an extreme case, for example, a profile with 10 reviews with consistent scores of only 10's has a standard deviation of zero, which I think is better than a profile of 40 reviews of 10's and 9's. Even 10 reviews of all 9's is arguably better than 40 reviews with an average of 9 that includes equal number of 10's and 8's.

In the old list, the scores near the bottom (ranking near 100) are under 7. In this new list, they are over 8. It is definitely more useful to me.

XXOOXX,
Apple
Your Bangkok Fantasy