Suggested new measuring method: vertical ruler

After having read the “LOT theory” thread, I guess we might be patting ourselves on our shoulders for “false” gains - i.e. stretching the suspensory ligs means that we are able to get the ruler further “down” in between the ligs and pubic symphysis (p.s.) bone. More info here: ModestoMan - Testing LOT Theory

This means that maybe we should consider a different measuring method.

Introducing the TPSMM 2.0 (Thunder's Place Standard Measuring Method 2.0)

Take hard ruler, extend from pubic bone along the penis angle. Now rotate the ruler along it’s length axis 90 degrees, so that the scribed section of the ruler is against the upper side of the shaft, along the middle (makes for easier reading). Now the ruler will not be able to slip in further down the p.s. bone (illusory gains due to lig lengthening) but will rest against the outer most part of the p.s. Maybe not as fun a measurement as the old one, but changes will be accurate over time, since the p.s. isn’t moving.

God, I have a knack for turning out threads that no one responds to. Thumbs up or thumbs down? Or was my description unclear?

I say thumbs up! Have not tried it yet but will do after my vacation!

I don’t get what you mean by extend from pubic bone along the penis angle but i get the rest of what you say.

I live dangerously and use a 12” steel ruler. It is too sharp for me to dig it into that angle between PS bone and ligaments so I am forced to rest it on my PS bone. I “round off” the sharp edges at the end by holding it between my thumb and forefinger when I press into that area.

It would be nice if a photo or video of the method is published. I also don’t get the part as mentioned by Johnnno

I thought this was already standard measuring technique;

vertical ruler along the top pressed against the fat pad?

Sounds good to me! I lost a bunch of weight this year and was surprised with all the tissue I could palpate right in the neighborhood of the pubic symphysis. Your abs (rectus abdominis) muscles attach, and parts of the fundiform ligament run down in front of the PS.

As a result, it can be very tricky to get an accurate bone pressed measurement. I’ve discovered, however, that there’s a little “pocket” where I can press my finger down and feel the actual contours of the PS. I’ve even been able to feel joint where the two rami meet.

That “pocket” is only 1/2” to 1” long, and I’ve made that the new resting place for the base of my ruler. If I place the ruler any higher, I butt up against the terminating rectus abdominus muscles and get a reduced measurement. If I place it any lower, the ruler starts to slide down the front face of the PS and I get an erroneously large measurement.

Also, it seems that the fat pad itself has a relief in the area of this pocket. Perhaps that’s what I’m really feeling. The fat itself is different in this spot. Can anyone confirm this?

Here’s a sketch of what I mean.

MM,

the two rami - are these the left and righ halves of the ps and the fuse joint in between? I’ve a little dent in the middle as well. I take that to be a dent in the bone.

I still don’t understand LOT and you want me to comment on a measuring method based on it?

Quite the contrary - not based on it at all.

Just a way to measure consistently over time, to ensure that gains are real gains and not “faux gains” from “peeling the ligs off the p.s.” as Modestoman put it.

I understand completely. I’ve read on this before and have been using this method for a while. Much more accurate!

Fat pad?

mgus your diagram is clear enough, though I couldn’t read the writing as my screen is 2” X 2”.

This is how I’ve been measuring all along.

We should, as a forum, differentiate various measuring techniques with diagrams. For fun I’d like to see a diagram of the Salvini technique, I realize it might be complicated, the Photoshop footnotes alone might take up several pages.

What do they mean ‘fat pad’?

NBP measurements to penalize a fellow for enjoying too much food, and this new method that penalizes someone that has busted their ass hanging for these “false” gains. Any other obstacles anyone wants to throw in?

I got exactly (and by that I mean ON THE MILLIMETER) the same measurement using this method as using my “regular” method. I’m not saying you’re wrong, people should probably learn how to measure properly, but there are some of us who measure properly anyway. :)