Model rankings update

[xxx]

We found and corrected a problem in the ranking algorithm (it was due to a misunderstanding).

You can check the updated lists here for LP : https://www.legalporno.com/model/list

And here for Pornbox : https://pornbox.com/application#model/list

You can see a lot of changes.

[ayrtight]

Scarlet Domingo , Sophia Traxler and Cindy Shine on page 1 ....
I hope they get sufficient scenes to honour their popularity .

[Wotan29]

I don´t get it:

Just as an example: Jillian Janson ranked 4th (with ONE DP scene for AA) and Aidra Fox ranked 20th (with ONE DP scene for AA), both in front of the legend Belle Claire ranked 28th (with DOZENS OF DAP, TAP etc. scenes) and the superstar Anne de Ville ranked 29th (with DOZENS OF DAP, TAP, Piss etc. scenes).

Are you serious? This should represent the most popular models on LP? Not considering at all, HOW MANY scenes and WHICH scenes a model shot?

Sorry, but there must be another HUGE problem in the algorithm!

If I were Anna de Ville and would see this ranking, my first thought would be:
WTF, I shoot regularly outstanding gangbang scenes for LP in Prague with DAP and TAP, lately even piss scenes ... and girls like Jillian Janson and Aidra Fox, who shot "en passant" one DP scene in the USA, are more popular than me and are ranked far in front of me? Leave me alone and kiss my ass, LP!"

[lemmy123]

I agree with Wotan.
It seems hard to believe, that e.g. Mina is less popular than Jillian Janson or Aidra Fox.
Florane and Kira Thorn on second page? Really?
And Monika Wild is less popular than Ashley Adams and Mandy Muse?
Just to name some of the most obvious rankings, that are hard to believe.

[xxx]

It's obviously based on their top scene. If a model with 20 scenes never reached the sales of a model with a single scene, she should not be ranked higher.

[Iddaoeeok]

OK, got you. I would caution that the apparent propensity of American porn users to buy any old rubbish with their favourite US pornstar is likely to distort any such ranking system though.

[misangrenegra2]

It's obviously based on their top scene. If a model with 20 scenes never reached the sales of a model with a single scene, she should not be ranked higher.

The algorithm is based only in their most top scene?

Random example:

Girl A:
Total number of scenes = 1
Sells: 50

Girl B:
Total number of scenes = 5
scene 1 sells: 30
scene 2 sells: 14
scene 3 sells: 25
scene 4 sells: 20
scene 5 sells:35

In that case Girl A will appear in the list over Girl B?

Im 50/50 agree with this, because its true that Girl A has sold in their top scene more than Girl B but Girl B has sold in general more than Girl A (This method can benifit girls with a lot of scenes but if they have more scenes is for a reason)

Other way would be a votes with note or something similar lbut would be "subjective"

[ayrtight]

^

I´m not sure if I understood you , but maybe you imply a voting system ?

I would be highly in favour it : Let´s say a user can give a rating from 1 to 5 ( or 1 to 10 ) for any model .
Then all the user ratings are calculated together and we´ll see lots of models with ranking between 6 and 8 points and the top models with rankings above 9 .
I have seen many porn paysites who do this .

I think this existed for LP some 3-4 years ago but for some reason it has been discontinued ( There should be an old thread about this somewhere ) .

[kidloco2]

How come Kizzy Six at the lowmid of the second page and still no more scenes?

[magizi877]

I think the ranking is flawed, from our perspective.

For instance, Jillian Janson doesn't seem likely to be featured again by an LP studio,
(this should be the end of the story as there is no point of even putting her in the top rank list,
but let's continue, because why not? lol)
in particular by the ones I care about, Gonzo and Giorgio. SO, with this in mind, ranking her higher
than Kira Thorn for instance, which is the DAP queen according to DAP-Addict, just doesn't make sense.

What doesn't clic is that the model who has seemingly done the crazy task of accumulating the most DAPs of recent times,
seem underappreciated by the STUPID ranking system.

I don't even like DAPs, and I'm telling you that Kira Thorn seems more committed to advancing the LP cause,
which is probably something like "making the best anal porn movies in the world" or something like "it must include DAP",
than Jillian Janson, who arguably just did an "OK" DP for LP.

THAT BEING SAID,

I think, you, as LP internal staff, should have an INTERNAL way of seeing the top seller models by individual scene,
to decide which girls are the most profitable for you,
but you should have an EXTERNAL way of seeing the rank, that puts the models with the most scenes, or the highest amount of copies sold,
considering their entire scene catalogue, visible to us the people who pay for this shit.

IMO of course.

[xxx]

It is clear that studios care only about the profitability of a model (which is identical to the rating we use).

Even from a user point of view, even though the logic is different, I would say that they care about the same thing : what are the best scenes/models.

Are you really that interested in knowing who shot the most scenes? Just take a look at the scene numbers, they are under your eyes, and then what? It's interesting for a minute and that's it.

[dpconnoisseur1]

^+1 fully agree!

It's obviously based on their top scene. If a model with 20 scenes never reached the sales of a model with a single scene, she should not be ranked higher.

This is exactly what I thought, thanks for confirming. It is the only way that it makes sense.

[Wotan29]

It's obviously based on their top scene. If a model with 20 scenes never reached the sales of a model with a single scene, she should not be ranked higher.

This is exactly what I thought, thanks for confirming. It is the only way that it makes sense.[/quote]

Well, that´s obviously wrong and falsifying in so many ways.
Do you really believe (just as one example of dozens), that Aidra Fox is more popular among LP users/buyers/viewers than Anna de Ville?
Only common sense should give you the answer...

And by the way: It is one of the ways, that it makes NO sense.

Will go more in detail soon.

[Wotan29]

No misunderstanding, please:
First sentence
This is exactly what I thought, thanks for confirming. It is the only way, that it makes sense.
is from dpconnoisseur1

(Quote-function didn´t work well)

[dap-addict]

It's obviously based on their top scene. If a model with 20 scenes never reached the sales of a model with a single scene, she should not be ranked higher.

Which previous algorithm was corrected?
What was this old algorithm?
I always thought algorithm means that girls with less scenes stand a chance against those with more scenes. But sure not that having just 1 TOP scene favorizes girls with 1 scene over those with 10+ scenes.

[Wotan29]

It's obviously based on their top scene. If a model with 20 scenes never reached the sales of a model with a single scene, she should not be ranked higher.

Which previous algorithm was corrected?
What was this old algorithm?
I always thought algorithm means that girls with less scenes stand a chance against those with more scenes. But sure not that having just 1 TOP scene favorizes girls with 1 scene over those with 10+ scenes.

That´s exactly one of the points, showing that the new "algorithm" (LOL) is so, so wrong and falsifying. Simply taking just the top selling of a girl (no matter, if she has 1 or 50 scenes) and then calling this an algorithm is ridiculous.

"Onetimer" Girls like Jillian Janson, Scarlet Domingo, Aidra Fox more popular on LP than legends like Belle Claire, Anna de Ville, Tina Kay, Charlotte Sartre? Come on man, you can´t be serious. Apart from a meaningful algorithm, just use your common sense.

Another little example: For sure Adriana Chechik is one of - if not THE - most popular models in the porn world. But NOT on LP! You have to take into account, that she actually doesn´t shoot for LP, in contrast to many other user favourite girls, who come again and again to shoot for you!

In case of "onetimers" vs girls with a lot of scenes I give you a little example to make the point even more clear:
Imagine there are 5 new LP subscribers. All 5 like Jillian Janson, so they look through the LP catalogue and see "Oh, there is 1 scene with her". All 5 buy the scene. The five guys also like Anna de Ville, so they look through the LP catalogue and see "Oh, there are more than 40 scenes with her". Each of the 5 guys buys 5 scenes with her, in total 25 scenes. Now it is possible, that everyone buys different scenes with Anna de Ville (remember, she has more than 40 scenes). Result for your new ranking: 5 sales for the one Jillian Janson scene, 25 x 1 sale for 25 different Anna de Ville scenes. Conclusion: Jillian Janson is more popular then Anna de Ville. LOL!

Next a little analogy:
Among the Top 100 best selling songs of all time in 9th place there is the one hit wonder "Yes Sir, I can boogie" by Baccara - way ahead of a Beatles song. So according to your new ranking system: Do you believe, Baccara is more popular in music than The Beatles? Or The Rolling Stones? Or AC/DC? Or or or...

So much to common sense, now some words to algorithms:
A meaningful algorithm is a very complicated and should be based on a lot of components. In case of the "most popular on LP" issue, only two of many possible remarks: 1. Two, three, four years ago LP had less subscribers and sales generally. So just as an example, probably 1000 sales for an Arwen Gold scene in the begiining of 2015 are much more valuable than 1100 sales for a Scarlet Domingo scene in the end of 2018. A solid algorithm should take things like that into account when it comes to "most popular". 2. A pretty good indicator for being most popular on LP is the thread of a model. A solid algorithm also should take the number of pages of a girl´s model thread into account - or even better: the number of user posts (as some pages are filled with scene photos when a model has a lot of scenes).

I could write even more about it, but I have the impression that would be lost time. Although obviously wrong, LP will remain on this absurd ranking system based only on the ONE top selling scene of a girl.

As I wrote in an older post of this thread; If I were Anna de Ville and would see this ranking, my first thought would be "WTF, I shoot regularly outstanding gangbang scenes for LP in Prague with DAP and TAP, lately even piss scenes ... and girls like Jillian Janson, Scarlet Domingo and Aidra Fox, who shot "en passant" one DP scene somewhere, are more popular than me and are ranked in front of me? Leave me alone and kiss my ass, LP!"

But maybe Giorgio (or whoever is responsible for that) thinks about it a bit more again.

Am I not right, Giorgio? (Be honest to yourself...)

[magizi877]

I agree with you, just wanted to say that,
the algorithm part is probably there avoid having somebody manually do the rankings.

[magizi877]

I wanted to add a different perspective.

When I want to watch a movie, normal one, not a porno.
I check the reviews, word of mouth, things like that,
to decide which movie to watch. And therefore pay money for it.

I never check how much money said movie, has accumulated in sales,
and therefore never check as in EVER, "the box office" to decide if a movie is worth watching or not.

I think the ranking system should maybe take into account the sales,
but maybe sales should just be 10% of the equation.

YOU KNOW,
when people come at the forum asking for which movie to watch,
they want to know which are the real best movies.

lol

[YumYum74]

@Wotan and magizi,

This makes a lot of sense. I'm not a mathematician, nor do I know anything about algorithms, but it always struck me as weird that a model with only one or at most a couple of scenes can get so high in a ranking system. Doesn't it make a lot more sense to have a model appear in the ranking system once she has f.e. 10 scenes (random number I'm picking for the example) under her belt? That way you would get a list more true to form in my eyes (which models are popular and thus are asked back to LP again and again). Plus a model might wanna shoot more scenes for LP to get her name on the ranking, who knows.

Like I said, know nothing about algorithms, so maybe I'm talking nonsense, but wanted to give my two cents anyway.