That is in my opinion a quite interesting although a bit dangerous question. The answer may be found in the TP size database. Volunteers needed! And do not forget to add time, method if PE (and determination) as analysis vector.
On the other hand, there are several reasons why not to seek for those answers:
- the data set is still unreliable because not only starting size but training method and determination has probably a stronger correlation to growth success
- it still is a self-reported data set. Although nobody has a reason to give false measures, we can not exclude the possibility.
- another issue is the ability of correct interpretation of statistical results. Even those who should be good at it often fail and make intuitive and faulty conclusions - there are studies how many medical professionals can’t interpret correctly a standard deviation! I don’t want to insult anybody, I for myself misinterpret statistics sometimes quite badly too.
- so concluding from statistical data to the potential of your own dick may be quite erroneous. As far as I have learned this at TP, the consensus is: every dick is very individual.
- last but not least: even if the data was completely reliable and time/method/consistency, should it be published? Imagine if the study gives the result that growth potential is let’s say 50% of the starting size. Now if one starts at 5.25, does he want to know he will probably never achieve the 8 inches he desires? Wouldn’t that be counter-productive information?
I think that as long as PE is not an academic subject with standardized procedures and supervised training (“now class, jelqing starts in 3-2-1-0 😁) we will not have this data and simply stick to the old wisdom of “every dick is individual and reacts individually”.
Modified forum rule #69: Your avatar must show a JUICY ass, may it be female, male, mermaid, even sheep or horses are accepted. :-)
My logbook: Richard65 - the roadbook