Another /fit/ survey

Thread replies: 14
Thread images: 5

Anonymous
Another /fit/ survey 2016-10-03 15:56:15 Post No. 38941739
[Report] Image search: [Google]

File: 1475493185986.jpg (140KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

Another /fit/ survey Anonymous 2016-10-03 15:56:15 Post No. 38941739 [Report]

http://www.strawpoll.me/11356010
Fraud or not?
GF/BF or not?
I want to see if there is a correlation.
I don't care how ripped you are or how much you can lift, or if you had 100 GFs in the past but don't have one atm, the question is simple
Thread is /fit/ related because it is /roid/ related. Please don't post feels, just your current experiences with roids and sexual partners.
Are you roiding right now? Do you have a GF right now?
Thank you for your time.

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:02:21 Post No.38941794
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:02:21 Post No.38941794 [Report]

Statistically, more people are natty than not, which means more will have gfs. This wont be an accurate poll.

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:05:54 Post No.38941824
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:05:54 Post No.38941824 [Report]

Frauds are just the upper echelon of gym regulars, you're unlikely to see any correlated difference. This is a retarded data selection choice anyway though.

>>38941794
He'd be measuring proportionally.

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:07:01 Post No.38941838
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:07:01 Post No.38941838 [Report]

>>38941794
>Statistically, more people are natty than not, which means more will have gfs. This wont be an accurate poll.
My only concern is the very small sample size. But if we assume that the sample properly represents the population, we can see how many natties have GFs and how many fraudsters do

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:08:29 Post No.38941848
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:08:29 Post No.38941848 [Report]

>>38941824
>Frauds are just the upper echelon of gym regulars
They should also be higher test.
>you're unlikely to see any correlated difference
We'll wait and see
>This is a retarded data selection choice anyway though.
Why?

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:20:08 Post No.38941977
[Report] Image search: [Google]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:20:08 Post No.38941977 [Report]

File: 1451976303278.jpg (81KB, 786x590px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 786x590px

>>38941739
Hmmmm interesting

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:22:23 Post No.38941999
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:22:23 Post No.38941999 [Report]

>>38941739
bump for interest

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:55:04 Post No.38942332
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 16:55:04 Post No.38942332 [Report]

>>38941848
>They should also be higher test.
Touche, I'm definitely more confident around girls and people in general now I'm fraud

>Why?
because your sample size is tiny and on a website known for trolling and with no vested interest in accuracy

I'm sure there're studies on testosterone levels and sexual attraction. I know of studies which show girls are far more attractive to men when they're fertile, for example.

Anonymous 2016-10-03 17:01:08 Post No.38942387
[Report] Image search: [Google]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 17:01:08 Post No.38942387 [Report]

File: Screenshot_2016-10-03-19-59-08.png (89KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 720x1280px

>>38941824
And what do you know, so far we have 2x the natties without GF compared to those who do, and the opposite for /frauds/. Acknowledging the tiny sample size, so far there seems to be a difference.

Anonymous 2016-10-03 17:09:09 Post No.38942450
[Report]

Anonymous 2016-10-03 17:09:09 Post No.38942450 [Report]

>>38942332
>because your sample size is tiny and on a website known for trolling and with no vested interest in accuracy
I I know, this is just for curiosity's sake