re: Sexiest TV/Movie Actresses 2000-2016 - Sweet 16 (Voting Closed) NSFW

iwyLSUiwy

Love-Hewitt
Blunt
Kelly
Shahi
Wilde
Hunington-Whitely
Dobrev
Biel

quote:

---

quote:
I, like a majority of those who voted, honestly thought Jessica Biel was better looking than Mila Kunis. I still do. I don't apologize for it.


Yep. Mila is a little overrated. She's the cute girl next door type of chick when you're 17. That doesn't get you far when competition is the likes of Biel.

---

Agreed. Personally, I think Daddario and Johannson are overrated, too. In a competition like this, it's all based on personal preference. To each his own.

quote:

---

quote:
J.Alba 35
S.Johansson 38

This is blasphemy. WTF

---

To each his own. There are hotter women out there but Johansson is the sexiest actress out there, IMO. There is just something about her demeanor and how she carries herself that jumps out at me in every role she plays. Just my opinion, Alba is hot as hell too.

North Region

8) Jennifer Love Hewitt

3) Amber Heard


West Region

1) Kate Beckinsale

3) Scarlett Johansson


South Region

1) Emmanuelle Chriqui

2) Kaley Cuoco


East Region

1) Alexandra Daddario

6) Alison Brie

quote:

---

The fact that neither Margot Robbie or Mila Kunis didn't make it to the sweet sixteen makes this whole thread invalid.

---

Can we all just acknowledge the fact that the seeding for the nominees was complete and utter bullshite?

Robbie might have deserved to be a 1, but how the hell can you pit her against an underrated J-Love in the second round?

I still have a chapped arse about having to vote out Julianne Hough after the first round.

Voting closed.

quote:

---

Top seed #1 plays lowest seed of every number, meaning...

There are 4 slots in every position, 1-16. Margot Robbie was the highest seeded #1 based on voting so she faces the lowest seeded numbers. Lowest #2, #3, #4, etc...

---

Please, don't talk down to me and explain to me how tournament seeding works. I'm fully aware of the structure.

quote:

---

How would you have ranked them? Because the way you just said is also subjective since you like those ladies. I left my personal feelings aside and went purely off of the nominations threads

---

The issue is that upon viewing the initial nominations thread, most guys likely came across an actress or two they thought were deserving and therefore neglected to nominate them again during their respective post submission. Meaning, there were several women who were probably universally appreciated but were consequently overlooked because it didn't seem necessary to nominate them multiple times.

I realize that you spelled out the rules, but some guys still didn't adhere to the nomination format.

Perhaps, the most effective way to determine the seeding is to require each nomination post to actually rank their 10 respective nominees according to sex appeal (think of this as the closest thing to an RPI ranking). That way, each nominee does not possess the same numerical value.

Also, we're being really liberal with our definition of 'actress'. Individuals like Rosie Huntington-Whiteley are much better known for their runway modeling than their acting. The girl has two film credits to her name, does that really justify her being labeled as an actress?

This bracket could look entirely different in the blink of an eye if the label "TV/movie actress" is omitted.

I'm not trying to act you specifically, because this is a pretty cool thread regardless of some flaws. The only issue I've had thus far is how arbitrary the seeding has been. In my opinion, the number of nominations just doesn't seem like the most effective way of evaluating seed positioning.