Does Big Girth Kill Length Gains?

“Work length first, then girth.”
“It’s easier to stretch a thin rubber band than a fat one.”

Conventional wisdom suggests that every increment of added girth makes length gains more difficult to achieve. This notion is intuitively appealing. Certainly, a dick with greater girth is likely to have more collagen fibers pulling in parallel to resist length gains.

At a personal level, the effects of girth on length gains became important to me since my newbie gains produced 0.7” of new girth but only 0.5” of new length. I’ve always been length challenged, and I had a long way to go to reach my goal. If girth inhibited length gains, I was in trouble.

But is the conventional wisdom correct? Does added girth really inhibit length gains?

In an attempt to shed light on this question, I recently delved into Size’s PE Data Site. As others have done, I downloaded the data into a spreadsheet and started playing. However, my focus was exclusively on the question of girth. Here’s what I found.

The Chart
I’ve attached a scatter plot of length gains versus initial girth for each poster in the PE database. Length gains are computed as final length for each poster minus the initial length for that poster. Initial girth is the poster’s first girth entry. I’ve thrown out data for all posters who posted only once, or posters whose total PE career, as reflected by the dates entered in the database, was less than 90 days.

The Data
The data surprised me.

Although there is a slight negative correlation (-0.20) between length gains and initial girth, the relationship is not as strong as I suspected. Numerous people with initial girths of 6” gained over 2” in length.

It’s hard to say whether the negative correlation is due to anatomy or something else. My sense is it’s something else. For example, it’s equally likely that guys that start out with bigger equipment simply don’t apply themselves as tenaciously to PE (why should they!).

Initial girth is strongly correlated with initial length (+0.63). Therefore, guys with big initial girths are generally hung.

The data also show a number of guys who started with relatively little girth and gained stupendously in length. I’d wager that these guys were exceedingly dedicated.

Conclusions:
Shit, I don’t know. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Still, the database certainly does not clearly show that girth by itself imposes excessive limits on length gains. The negative correlation between length gains and initial girth can be just as easily explained by other factors.

Awesome scatter chart ModestoMan. It looks like the highest reported gain in length is 3.75 inches (one reported) with 3 other members hitting the 3 inch mark. Those are incredible gains and should be motivation to us all. If I am reading your data correctly the big gainers ALL had a girth of less than 5 inches. No gains over 2.5 inches were reported by individuals starting with over 5 inches in girth.

It is also interesting to learn that a great number of people reported gains close to an inch or more with many exceeding two inches. It would seem that many of us will be able to reach aour goals.

I would love to see you crunch the numbers a little more and show us time vs gains. Also, how about some basic stats like average starting length and girth.

And you thought you were going to rest :)

Good Work!

Is large initial girth correlated with large initial length? If so, you might want to compare initial girth and % of penis length gained. I seems like it might be easier for a guy with 7 inches initial length to gain an inch than a guy with 5 inches initial length.

Hmm… maybe I should start my pumping with a 1.5” cylinder instead of a 1.75” and pack it (almost immediately) and pull for length! I could barely fit a 1.5… and I want to gain about twice as much length as I do girth.

What penismith said. There are a number of ways you could remedy this problem.

It was great of you to go to all that effort! Thanks.

Wow, definitely a correlation (all be it a loose one) to the length gains to starting girth. I bet if there were a real scientific PE experiment where all participants followed the same routine devoutly to the same intensity (if that were measurable) then that correlation would be more definite. But it definitely seems to fit to the old rubber band theory!

It also shows how much people like to round their measurements, as can bee seen from there being virtually complete lines (made up of the points) vertically up from different figures of the girth (eg. 4.5, 5, 5.25, 5.5 etc)

But great work, Modesto, really helping me see that I could probably gain a bit more quickly length-wise if I put a tad more work in! Thanks for the graph! :D

I do love looking at scatter graphs, I think they hold real value for a subject such as PE. For instance, this one shows that a person with a 5” girth can be realistically expected to post a gain of 3/4” in length. Of course, they could gain more, and probably will, but these are what they are realistically expected to post.

For those not used to viewing scatters here is a simple method, either print it out, or just put it up on your monitor. get as far away from the graph as possible look at the graph and you should see the “grouping” where the majority of dots fall. Walk towards the graph looking at the grouping and put your finger on the grouping. Then read it.

It isnt an average, or a mean or medium. However, they do give you a realistic idea.

Have you got any more scatter graphs?

Thanks everybody for your interest. As an initial matter, I need to correct an error. I said above that several people with 6” girth gained 2” or more in length. Actually only one did. Sorry for the error.

Yes. All seven of them. Conspicuously absent from this plot is Bib’s numbers. Bib’s starting girth was 5” and his length growth was 4.5”, so I doubt there’s anything magical about the 5” number.

It’s hard to get useful information by considering time. Some guys give up PE for long intervals; others don’t work out at all and actually shrink between measurements. Again, the scatter plot comes to the rescue, as shown in the attachments below.

Basic Stats:

Mean Starting BPEL: 6.37”
Mean Starting EG: 5.00”
Mean Length Growth (START TO FINISH): 0.82”
Mean Girth Growth (START TO FINISH): 0.39”

Initial length is strongly correlated with initial girth (+0.63).

Attached is the chart you asked for, which compares percentage length gain with initial girth.

The correlation is slightly stronger than the first chart, which measured length growth in inches (-0.26 here versus -0.20 above).

BTW, what I really like about the scatter plot is that it preserves information about individuals. A straight linear regression through any of these charts would be misleading. For example, linear regression would predict that someone with a girth of 7.6” could only expect to gain about 0.2” in length. However, our only data point at that level of girth shows a gain of 1.25”, over 6 times the predicted value.

If anything, the data supports what has been said here over and over: PE is an individual thing; your mileage may vary.

I am glad we have guys like you who take the time to pick PE apart. Thanks MM.

PM, Well said - & MM, really well done presentation.

MrTiPS

ModestoMan, you are THE MAN! Thanks for the hard work. If we could get everyone to use the Thunder’s database to track their gains this could easily be the most accurate and detailed study ever done. I believe we are much more likely to record accurate data here because we are trying to track actual results and not just replying to a survey. Lets push for everyone to get into the database.

These stats surprised me:

Mean Starting BPEL: 6.37”
Mean Starting EG: 5.00”

Wow, that’s a nice dick to start with. Makes me wonder if Kinsey was right all a long.

Thanks guys. I’ve been meaning to do this for the past couple of weeks. BTW, please go to the database and enter your stats (early and often), if you haven’t done so already. I agree that this database is an excellent source of information and motivation for us PE’ers.

It’s a good idea, and it does have merit, but I don’t think you can conclude anything from that data. The big assumption is that everybody in that set was doing equally as much work, with equal intensity and motivation, for both girth and length work.

It was already pointed out that girth was positively correlated with length. So chances are, someone with a big girth already has good length, so they wouldn’t need or want giant length gains. Even if they didn’t have great length, someone with big girth would probably have less PE drive overall than someone who is lacking in both areas.