The Overated and Underated awards!

[Guest bluboy]

It is widely said that there are different strokes for different folks and one man's milk is another man's poison yada yada yada. We all know that Traveller raves about Kirk while the rest of us keep away and wonder what the hell is he on. So here is the question, have you had the experience that you see a whole slew of reviews on someone all very consistent and then you meet the person and say what are my fellow fags thinking? Where are your overated escorts or underated escorts? For me Scott Matthews is a huge colossal waste- the man is a closet bottom. Enzo is another waste despite the drooling reviews and so is Adam. On the other hand Greg who is portrayed as the devil incarnate is always of source of great pleasure for me and I am a demanding little slut. So too Stefan who from the reviews sound like he would put you to sleep is for me an orgasmic feast of german cock and butt. Any of you had these expereinces? Where have you seen a mismatch between the review and your own experience? blu

[Guest TFNH]

While I would be the first one to write a great review of a great expeience(and have done so), I would be reluctant to write a negative one simply because it is it is often going to boil down to "different strokes for different folks". Simply because you are paying in no way guarantees that the whole chemistry thing is going to come into play. I would of course reconsider my position if there was some type of blantant fraud involved. I have had some relatively bad experiences; my course of action was to provide the escortor service with specific feedback that hopefully they will hear in an undefensive way, and use that feedback to improve their service in the future. While it has never happened, I think a wise escort would solicit feedback, because whether it is this job or any other, feedback about about performance is how we all learn, improve, and grow.

 

My only gripe about all escorts I have been with(without exception) is that during the inevitable after sex chatter the conversation should not be about other clients, their boyfrineds or lack thereof, etc. I realize that escorts often want to be seen as people and not just objects, but hey, this is my time for sexual therapy, not theirs. With the things that have been told to me, I have often wondered to myself, "Do I look like the Clara Barton of the Emotional Red Cross?".

[excelntsvc]

Top of my list for Over-rated would have to be Cole Davis ... great website, great reviews ... aging and unfulfilling in person .... pics must be 5 years old ... nice enough guy, but certainly not worth the hype or the expense.

 

Top of list for under-rated would probably be Chris Porter in Lauderdale ... he's gotten some knocks on this board and the muscle service station ... has always been incredibly nice, very interactive and loads of fun (focus on the loads guys!)

 

And then there are those who promote themselves incredibly ... Chris/tian/opher in Miami ... advertises in Hotspots with several ads ... compares himself to JFK Jr (perhaps he ment JERK Sr?), a Boss Model, manager of a construction site ... stick to your guns w hen you kick this one out gentlemen!

[Guest Kenny]

>" Where have

>you seen a mismatch between

>the review and your own

>experience?"

 

Jon Ramsey (one of the top ten escorts)

 

Jeremy (former escort from Campus in NYC)

 

Jason,again from Campus in NYC

 

In all fairness to Jeremy and Jason from Campus, there appeared to be something wrong with both of them that night. For one thing, each was abt one hour late for the appointment. They were not completely unsatisfactory but I wold not hire them again. Jon Ramsey's problem is that he is very limited in his activities and is TOTALLY SELF ABSORBED.

[+ Charlie]

Some of the most entertaining conversations I have had with escorts after the act have been about other escorts and clients. Post-coital conversational topics are also basically a matter of taste.

 

In response to the original post, I have never found a serious disconnect between the general tenor of reviews and my personal experience of an escort, although I am often less (or more) enthusiastic than other clients have been; for instance, I also found Cole Davis less satisfying than I had hoped, but certainly not the huge disappointment that the other poster expressed. Once again, we all must remember to take every review with a grain of salt, since it often reveals as much about the reviewer as about the escort.

[+ nycman]

It's the Chemisrty Stupid!

 

Always remember the three most important predictors of having a good time with an escort:

 

Chemistry

Chemistry

Chemistry

 

The funny thing is that I thought Cole Davis' reviews are accurate and if anything he's slightly underrated. Hey, that's my experience. Your mileage may vary. On the Enzo front, I was surprised he didn't have more glowing reviews. Again, chemistry.

 

I find that I often have the best time with an escort when I go in with realistic expectations. If he exceeds those expectations, then I leave the encounter with a shit-eating grin on my face. If he simply meets those expectations then I leave happy. If he’s a nice guy but fails to meet those expectations, then I scratch him off my list and right if off to “bad chemistry”. It's that simple.

 

Good chemistry is hard to find and you can't buy it or fake it. Stellar reviews here or even past experiences with the same escort are no guarantee that you will have similar experiences in the future. I'm sure we could all write books on escorts whom we loved on the first encounter and couldn't stand on the second.

 

I use the reviews here to avoid the whackos, rip-off artists and guys who are definitely not my "type". Figuring out the rest of the equation is up to you and can only done in a face-to-face encounter with the escort.

 

In short….it’s the chemistry stupid!

[Losgatan]

Any of you

>had these expereinces? Where have

>you seen a mismatch between

>the review and your own

>experience? blu

 

It seems more likely to me that there's been a mismatch between the reviews and your expectations.

 

If a review describes a scene that's significantly different from what you're into, it's a good bet that whatever was said is beside the point as far as you're concerned.

[CT Dick]

>My only gripe about all escorts

>I have been with(without exception)

>is that during the inevitable

>after sex chatter the conversation

>should not be about other

>clients, their boyfrineds or lack

>thereof, etc.

 

Isn't that funny, TF, I've almost never had a conversation like this. When I have it has struck me as so inappropriate that i have changed the subject.

 

Dick

[HooBoy]

RE: It's the Chemisrty Stupid!

 

NYC Man Wrote:

 

>I use the reviews here to

>avoid the whackos, rip-off artists

>and guys who are definitely

>not my "type". Figuring out

>the rest of the equation

>is up to you and

>can only done in a

>face-to-face encounter with the escort.

>

>

>In short….it’s the chemistry stupid!

 

Well put! How I wish more people would use this site with

those words in mind.

 

HooBoy

Email: HooBoy@male4malescorts.com

[Guest N]

>For me Scott Matthews is

>a huge colossal waste- the

>man is a closet bottom.

 

Hi, I can't let this go by unchallanged. I am sure that "for you" Scott is a waste...no one can argue with your opinion.

 

However, "for me" Scott is the embodiment of a true professional who is whatever his client wants him to be. Perhaps you guided him into what was unsatisfactory for you. As for me...there are a couple as good - but none better.

[Guest bottomboykk]

I agree. Sorry Scott wasn't what you wanted, bluboy, but Scott showed me that he is the ultimate in tops. He fucked me 4 times (twice each on 2 "dates" that I had with him), and I've never encountered a more skillful top. I've been with a lot of other big-dicked guys, but I've never had one who was as good as Scott is at entering a tight ass without any pain. He's tops (pun intended) with me.

[Damascene]

I've been with Scott Matthews once. I thought he was quite good

but a bit overpriced. There is another escort who get rave

reviews from trustworthy reviewers and high ranked on the Matt

Adam's award with whom I had an unsatisfactory experience. I

assumed it was off night and tried again. Another unsatisfactory

experience resulted for me. Sometimes personalities don't click.

 

I do wonder though if there are escorts that reach an apex and

start to slide downhill? Most of my regular escorts tend to

retire before this happen.

[Traveller]

My only problem with Scott is that a purth falls out of his mouth everytime he speaks. Kinda takes away from a hot, aggressive, top image.

 

Later.

[Matt_Vancouver]

Traveller, I was just in SF last week and this HOT HOT HOT big muscled daddy was walking his rottweiler down the street towards me, I couldn't take my eyes off of him, until he bumped into a friend of his, and he opened his mouth and a string of pearls fell out. (otherwise known as carring a bag full of S's)

Matt(doesn't have the gay accent)

http://go.to/mattsplace

matt_escort@yahoo.com

[Guest skywalker]

My only problem with Scott is that a purth falls out of his mouth everytime he speaks. Kinda takes away from a hot, aggressive, top image.

 

What's a "purth?" Can't find the word in my dictionairies.

[Guest joey toddoo]

To add to the list:

 

Overrated:

Matt/Excellent Top -- rude and not nice

Mark Wolff -- if he still sees guys/total rip-off/just does oral

Cole Davis -- not that into it when I was with him

Brendan Grant -- not worth the money

David Peirre -- one of the worst ones ever

Derrek Gallan -- he was drunk when he saw me

Jason (the bodybuilder) in Chicago -- couldn't get it up!

 

Underrated:

Yuri in Orlando -- yummy!

Gino Mancuso -- awesome!

John (from THE AGENCY in Chicago) -- WOW!

[HooBoy]

Who the hell is this guy to come along with zero posts and suddenly be slamming guys with good reputations?

 

This thread really sucks. There is absolutly no accountability.

 

HooBoy

Email: HooBoy@male4malescorts.com

[Guest bottomboykk]

Uh, HooBoy, remember that the post counter has not worked ever since we went to being moderated! Therefore, we have no idea how many posts he's really done.

 

And, I have to say, he has a right to express his opinions about escorts like anyone else does.

 

I love ya, Hoo, but you're off base here.

[Guest Esc_Tracker]

I am not too keen on this thread myself, though I have been reading it (albeit, with some unease). :-(

 

In any case, whatever the rights of the previous poster to his opinion, it *is* remarkable that he should express such strong views about so many escorts without having submitted even *one* review. Forgive me for possibly being a bit catty, but I am sort of with HooBoy on this one. This site is about *reviews* and too many on this message board seem to want to "play" without going through the hassle of anteing up.

 

Perhaps this should be the basis for another thread, but I would be very interested in the views of all of you here and now. Why do some of you participate without contributing?

 

Esc-Tracker

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

I'm in general agreement on this...

 

It's just too easy to slam someone without going into some detail about the problem. Difficult to separate the score-settling or difficult personalities etc. from the true bad escort encounter. And I'm very queasy about inputs in threads like this one from those unknowns who don't contribute reviews... although the comment may be on the up-and-up, the dichotomy does makes me wonder about the motive.

[+ deej]

I'll side with HooBoy as well. A NEW poster here with no history of reviews (but no end of opinions about highly regarded escorts) is suspect.

 

Now, I don't want to be slamming new posters. All are welcome! But we all know there's a loose canon out there.

 

And I also find this thread distasteful. There is no single ideal for a client. No escort is perfect for all. Over/Under rated is a pretty dumb discussion.

 

You say tomato, I say tomAHto.

[Guest CZ]

If this thread has caused uneasiness, it may be because it touches on the most fundamental problem of the site itself.

 

While I think everyone will agree that male4malescorts is a place to exchange info & opinion on the escort scene, no one seems to agree on how best to carry out that exchange. Two opposing kinds of information--the review & the posted message--sit side by side, but not very comfortably; and regulars here seem uncertain whether either kind has any consistent reliability.

 

One one hand, you've got the review (which, whether real or phony, is a deliberately crafted affair that takes some time to get from reviewer to reader, & is theoretically 'investigated' and moderated by Hooboy); and on the other, the quickly thought-out & promulgated posting I've called the 'excited utterance' sort of review. On one hand, purple prose in multiple paragraphs, and on the other, such terse bulletins as "Scott Matthews is just a Big Girl with a biggish dick."

 

Those who give much greater credence to reviews than to postings like to think that the former are much less likely to be fraudulent. But are they? Does the fact that any given reviewer has submitted a dozen reviews really & truly make his opinions any more reliable? (Maybe he's just a frustrated Harlequin Romance writer who gets off on describing one encounter after the other in which "he swept me into his manly arms.") Does a reviewers's frequency of appearance, in & of itself, actually bolster credibility any more than, say, Aaron Lawrence's 13-odd reviews make him a must-see escort on everybody's list?

 

Hooboy's somewhat startling post above has many implications. But one that especially intrigues me is the possibility that he's being huffy, not only because some of this site's sacred cows got slammed, but that the de-bunking of escorts as 'overrated' calls into question (yes, once again!) his own participation in what goes on here--with all those dark suspicions of bias, manipulation & conflict of interest roiling up to the surface.

 

If the formal reviews were to be scrapped, and all commentary were to take place in a free-form & only lightly moderated way in a message center equipped with a really reliable & sophisticated search engine, Hooboy's role here, and all the busy-work he has attached to it, would be greatly reduced. I for one would welcome that, but, clearly, his loyal (& no doubt sincere) advocates would not.

 

Now, before the chorale warms up to sing, let me once again contrast this site with the logbook at Ace Bannon's MuscleService. Those of you who have been there know that it, too, is an exchange of information on escorts (with the emphasis, of course, on bodybuilders & bb types), but one conducted in a relatively free-for-all way. Despite the fact there are no formal reviews (and therefore no 'Ace Investigates' interventions), the 'truth' (whatever THAT may be) seems to emerge sooner or later to the general satisfaction of logbook regulars. I'm not saying that such an arrangement would be good for this site, but I'd certainly like to hear from anyone who can show how it would be bad.

 

And finally, being at risk for being dismissed as 'a loose canon' for these remarks, let me flatly deny that I am a doctor of divinity run amok--the comic image that misspelling evokes--nor am I a cannon of the other sort.

 

But fire back, if you will.

[Guest Esc_Tracker]

Having largely highjacked this thread, I will step up, roll my sleeves back, and answer this one.

 

Warning! This is not a "happy" post. x(

 

The issue is not whether the message board or the "formal" reviews list is the more accurate, most spontaneous, most interactive, best moderated, or most objective forum. It is whether structured and detailed reviews broken down by city and which are designed to facilitate comparability, provide photos, give us basic insight in the explicit tastes and preferences of the authors, and which are accompanied by the escort's response, if any, are better than a chaotic swirl of unverifiable chatter. The two could obviously be merged, but what would be the point?

 

Yes, I am uneasy about this thread, and not because I want to challenge its existence or deny anyone the moral right to use it to undermine the hype he feels may surround certain escorts. I just find it inexplicable that someone who feels he has sufficient intimate familiarity with a dozen reviewed escorts should essentially critique both the reviews and the escorts themselves on this board without even once having sent in a review of his own.

 

Perhaps, just perhaps, the hype might have been a bit lessened if he had sent in his own reviews detailing his less than sterling experiences. Perhaps, just perhaps, the underating he feels some other escorts might be suffering from might have been corrected if he had sent in one of the glowing reviews he seems to believe they deserve.

 

If he had done so, I would have considered his observations far less remarkable.

 

So that's my question. If he thinks the reviews of some of these guys don't match his experiences, why isn't he sending in reviews of his own? What's stopping him?

 

Next, has it occured to you that the reason most of the reviews are glowing might somehow be related to the fact that most of the reviewers had a good time? What do you expect? That half the escorts out there should be so bad as to rate bad reviews? We hire escorts because we enjoy the experience, not because we work for some quality assurance outfit. We write good reviews because we are eager to have others share the good times we did. We write bad reviews to warn people off from those few escorts whom we feel were dishonest, abusive, unprofessional or poor performers.

 

Those in between just don't rate reviews. The reason for this is that most of us realize that different folks like different strokes. The chemistry may not have been good for us, but others may have a better time. Anyone who would write a review saying something like "I am really into passive twink bottoms but I thought I would try a hulking dominant top for a change and didn't enjoy the experience because he wouldn't bend over and his muscles were too hard" would obviously have too much time on his hands.

 

I am exagerating of course, but you should get the general idea. When you read a superlative review, ask yourself whether you can identify with the experience, given the escort's photo, price and the stated preferences of the critic. If you can't, then set that particular review aside and move to the next one. It doesn't mean the review is exessively favorable. It just means the chemistry might not have been right for you.

 

Finally, just one last point. Why is it that if some of us agree with HooBoy on some point or other it means we have to be his "loyal advocates" (whatever that means)? Can't these issues be discussed on their own merits without resorting to this kind of implied ad hominem put down?

 

(an irritated) Esc-Tracker

[Traveller]

>

>What's a "purth?" Can't find the

>word in my dictionairies.

 

 

A purth is usually carried by the mithus of the houth.

 

Later.

 

PS. Matty, I'm surprised no one's climbed down your throat for the "gay accent" comment. Seems everyone's still brown nosing ya. Of course I appreciate the politically incorrect humor.

[Guest joey toddoo]

Sorry to cause such a stir, guys!!!!!!!!!

 

Yes I am indeed NEW to the Message Center -- but not to this site. I have a NEW NAME that's different from my review name. OOPS, was I supposed to keep the same name?

 

I have written and submitted over 5 reviews on Hooboy's site in the past and I hope to continue writing more.

 

The last listing I provided might have been a bit harsh, but I have been with all the above listed escorts. My comments were quick and to the point -- and was an accurate account "in a nutshell" from my persaonl sessions with those escorts.

 

So, here's more:

 

UNDERRATED:

Jake Walker - San Francisco

Bruce Warren - now in LA

Shane in Orlando (I don't know if he stills escorts)

 

OVERRATED:

Steve Teron -- not in shape (his pics are many years old)

 

So, can I join your club now