Like John, she might have been a bit particular if we compare the sheer number of matches to your quantity of available loves, but hey, i might be too if every right swipe results in a match. See also “The vicious group of Tinder”.

Days 2-6 – Berlin, Munich, Copenhagen, London, Paris

Interested in the specific situation in European countries, as well as in order to use the traveler’s boost, Jane and John “visited” some cities that are highly populated both liked and hid their distance on the profiles.

John’s experiences:

Following the first or 2nd time, John started seeing more attractive potential matches in the queue. He nevertheless had about 20-30 likes that are open over at the conclusion of his days, nevertheless now he ended up being additionally making your way around 10 matches a day. It’s tough to state if it was because of their rating slowly getting up and rating him as more appealing, thus showing him more attractive pages, or just because of the location change. Perhaps a mixture of both, but seeing that this occurred slowly i believe it is safe to state the previous played a role that is leading.

Boosting appeared to help John rise above the crowd more, nearly doubling their loves that day. The boost didn’t get him any more matches than usual because, well, “the extra likes seemed to come from a much broader population than my usual match queue” at the same time. (Read: less appealing).

Day 7 – New York

Weary of swiping through a huge selection of profiles daily yet perhaps not to be able to keep in touch with any matches, John and Jane were very happy to invest their last day on Tinder.

Being the most densely populated city of this United States, we likely to end this test by having a surge in likes, a love spike. Interestingly, this indicates New Yorkers actually didn’t like our two subjects all of that much. Well, at the very least John. Jane nevertheless got around 500 loves there. He got about 5 available likes with no extra matches. This is certainly independent of the one he got from snooping and cheating through their silver queue.

Perhaps the main cause for the drop in likes is they had both used their improve the day before, albeit in a city that is different. Perhaps New Yorkers are only pickier.

Anyhow, let’s get to the business that is gruesome of ratings:

The winner for this round of “Tinder – Guys vs. Gals”, with no shadow of any doubt, is Jane with an astonishing 7506 unseen likes on top of 83 matches that braved the test of ultimate pickiness.

The consolation award would go to John along with his 19 remaining likes and 55 matches . Good effort online, John. Good work.


No, this test wasn’t exactly scientific. We only had two subjects rather than thousands, and their supposedly attractiveness that is equal be all too subjective. It is also possible John ended up being too picky and will have gotten an improved rating and much more matches if he swiped right more, or had a far more bio that is interesting or messaged any one of their matches. a guideline that doesn’t appear to connect with women that are attractive appears, though that knows exactly what her figures might have been if she simply randomly swiped right 50% of that time.

Although, just by the attractiveness of their matches and match suggestions, it is reasonable to state Tinder thinks they are both extremely people that are attractive.

Yes, you will find difficulties with this test and the total email address details are perhaps not representative. However the difference in those two outcomes can be so vast, and supported by so much anecdotal proof, that we could draw some conclusions as a result.

Tinder does still work with men (significantly), simply because they are very appealing.

Years ago, John’s outcomes might have been just about normal. Recently though, numerous male users get several likes to their first day, and then all but 0 from day 2 onward. Unless they pay for boosts, this is certainly. Simply to make certain, we had John stay somewhat active in Boston for the next and he continued getting 10-15 likes daily week. So yes, you can easily still get matches as a guy on Tinder without having to pay. You just need to be ridiculously appealing.

The male/female ratio of Tinder users needs to be completely skewed.

Yes, women can be generally pickier than guys. Yes, this can be exacerbated on Tinder via a feedback cycle. Yes, boosters are displacing non-boosters in people’s match queue. Yes, “top picks” is skimming from the top. No, these reasons alone can not be accountable for a 100 times higher like+match count for women compared to males.

Have there been always more males than ladies on Tinder? Most Likely. Has Tinder been bleeding users that are female its glory times? Maybe. Is it feasible their company decisions are only doing their component to aggravate the issue to the point where guys that are average very little matches anymore without investing? Certainly.

Tinder has effortlessly gone pay to try out ( for guys)

Which can be fine, it is exactly that they forgot to inform everybody else. Now your choice left for you is whether you’re ready to spend a huge selection of bucks a month on an app that is dating or if you’d instead explore additional options. Which other choices, you may well ask? Well there’s Bumble, or… bars? The match group has a practice of getting out and applying their unique touch to any application that presents perhaps the slightest opportunity to become a danger to Tinder.

Do you want to inform us regarding your experience? Something to include or correct? Feel free to leave a comment below, or look at the SwipeHelper Subreddit. See you there ??