Page 1 of 2 [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

ehymw
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2013
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 418

17 Jan 2017, 8:53 pm

If two people are a 90%+ match on ok cupid, both are attractive, live a 1/2 hour from each other, and neither is seeing anyone is it crazy to think they aren't compatible?



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,469
Location: Phoenix, AZ

17 Jan 2017, 8:54 pm

I'm not sure I understand the question



Luhluhluh
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 3 Dec 2016
Gender: Female
Posts: 242
Location: Wisconsin

17 Jan 2017, 9:23 pm

That's because it doesn't take into consideration that certain "something." Call it chemistry if you want. But someone can look great on paper but won't necessarily translate into attraction.


_________________
That which does not kill us makes us stranger.


GiantHockeyFan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,710

18 Jan 2017, 8:47 am

Well, if that was the case I should have had 25+ girlfriends. I had a match that was 98% and to say it was a waste of time trying to communicate with her would be an understatement: to make a long story short, I obviously didn't have a good enough career for princess. I would imagine my wife would have been around 80% or less as we have few common interests, she is significantly older and wouldn't have answered the 'adult' questions in any way yet we have an outstanding relationship that is the envy of many. In fact, she wasn't even one of my 150+ eHarmony matches over the years and was a 'flex' match I ignored at first. In short, love isn't a mathematical formula!

I would go so far as to say EVERYONE on OKCupid I met or corresponded with was a waste of time. Since it was a free site, I doubt anyone I talked to took it or relationships the least bit seriously. Apparently it's only gotten worse as the years have gone on.



izzeme
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,596

18 Jan 2017, 9:18 am

still being incompatible is a decent chance, even at a 90% okcupid match.

the match is only based on the "looking for" and the answered questions. It gives a decent idea, but indeed, that "something" is not measured.



Datalis
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 16 Jan 2017
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 133

18 Jan 2017, 9:24 am

One of the rare things I like about okcupid, is the sexual questions. Oral sex is a must for me, so that's the first thing I look for on their questions.



ehymw
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2013
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 418

18 Jan 2017, 3:26 pm

Luhluhluh wrote:
That's because it doesn't take into consideration that certain "something." Call it chemistry if you want. But someone can look great on paper but won't necessarily translate into attraction.


Don't two people need to meet before deciding if there's chemistry?



1df5e76
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2013
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 73
Location: USA

19 Jan 2017, 4:12 am

Higher match percentages just mean that you are less likely to be clearly incompatible. They don't mean that you'll get along or like each other.



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,888
Location: Kansas

19 Jan 2017, 4:43 am

You should watch "Married at First Sight". Those couples match completely on paper by experts so they are married - very few stay married due to lack of chemistry. One woman stayed married after her new husband's looks really upset her and it was because he had a great personality. They ended up renewing their vows again. That was sweet.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


RandomFox
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 88
Location: Nottingham

19 Jan 2017, 5:13 am

For me it's always been the incompatibility % (was it called % enemy?) that mattered most, anyone above let's say 65% match was pretty much compatible but anybody over 20% disagreement was a definite no (tried and tested). My current boyfriend was I think 94% match and below 10% incompatible.



GiantHockeyFan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,710

19 Jan 2017, 12:15 pm

nurseangela wrote:
You should watch "Married at First Sight". Those couples match completely on paper by experts so they are married - very few stay married due to lack of chemistry. One woman stayed married after her new husband's looks really upset her and it was because he had a great personality. They ended up renewing their vows again. That was sweet.


I actually thought of that show when I read this topic. I watched it last year with my then Fiancee and I predicted that 2 or the 3 would fail. I was wrong: it was all 3. One woman never even gave her husband a chance and had the personality of dried toast. In short, this further proves that there is no formula for love.



ehymw
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2013
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 418

19 Jan 2017, 1:04 pm

RandomFox wrote:
For me it's always been the incompatibility % (was it called % enemy?) that mattered most, anyone above let's say 65% match was pretty much compatible but anybody over 20% disagreement was a definite no (tried and tested). My current boyfriend was I think 94% match and below 10% incompatible.


I apparently forgot to mention we got 0% enemy.



nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,888
Location: Kansas

19 Jan 2017, 2:07 pm

GiantHockeyFan wrote:
Well, if that was the case I should have had 25+ girlfriends. I had a match that was 98% and to say it was a waste of time trying to communicate with her would be an understatement: to make a long story short, I obviously didn't have a good enough career for princess. I would imagine my wife would have been around 80% or less as we have few common interests, she is significantly older and wouldn't have answered the 'adult' questions in any way yet we have an outstanding relationship that is the envy of many. In fact, she wasn't even one of my 150+ eHarmony matches over the years and was a 'flex' match I ignored at first. In short, love isn't a mathematical formula!

I would go so far as to say EVERYONE on OKCupid I met or corresponded with was a waste of time. Since it was a free site, I doubt anyone I talked to took it or relationships the least bit seriously. Apparently it's only gotten worse as the years have gone on.


That's very neat. If I may ask, how much older is your wife? And did her age bother you when you first met her? Do you think it will bother you later on?


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


nurseangela
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,888
Location: Kansas

19 Jan 2017, 2:17 pm

GiantHockeyFan wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
You should watch "Married at First Sight". Those couples match completely on paper by experts so they are married - very few stay married due to lack of chemistry. One woman stayed married after her new husband's looks really upset her and it was because he had a great personality. They ended up renewing their vows again. That was sweet.


I actually thought of that show when I read this topic. I watched it last year with my then Fiancee and I predicted that 2 or the 3 would fail. I was wrong: it was all 3. One woman never even gave her husband a chance and had the personality of dried toast. In short, this further proves that there is no formula for love.


Ok, I think you're talking about the nursing student with the black hair and she was paired with the red haired guy with the beard. Problem with that match was that he was totally attracted to her but she wasn't to him and he kept saying she wasn't trying. You have to have some attraction or it won't work. It might have worked with me because he did have a pretty good personality and I have to have someone with a good personality. :mrgreen: You are right about her - she hardly even cracked a smile. He must have only cared for looks.


_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.

Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.


GiantHockeyFan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,710

19 Jan 2017, 4:25 pm

nurseangela wrote:
That's very neat. If I may ask, how much older is your wife? And did her age bother you when you first met her? Do you think it will bother you later on?


She is about 6 years older than me. Yes, her age did bother me a bit, mostly because I was relatively inexperienced and knew that 40 is getting too old for a child. When she first introduced herself to me, I thought she was just a friendly, beautiful college student that remembered me from my college days as she looked about 25. My biggest concern was that we would lose a child due to her age and while we did lose one already, it was likely not because of that. I am okay with it because she has taken great care of herself and my late Grandfather was 5 years younger than my (living) Grandmother. That, and my experience of dating anyone my age of younger was frustrating to put it mildly. I don't throw around subjective terms like soulmate often but yes, she is my soulmate.

As for that nursing student on the show (Ashley was her name), she reminds me of about half the women I dated: no personality, very self-centered and just looking for an excuse to blame you for everything as they made up their mind within seconds. In short: they are single for a reason.