sjmvsfscs08;1089389 wrote:^^Agreed. She has a smokin' hot body, but her face, while registering highly on the cute scale, is nothing to write home about. She's still a 9.9/10 though in my book.
Absolutely....But does a 9.9 even make it into my competition for a top-10? No.
Maybe the best way I can explain it is, there are several pictures in this thread where I go "oh, wow, maybe I was wrong....maybe I just haven't seen the right pictures". And every time those have turned out to be pictures of Brooklyn Decker. It's not that Kate isn't phenomenally gorgeous and
almost perfect
, but she's missing/lacking something. And that's the difference between a top-10 "perfect 10" and hundreds of "
almost". Honestly, IMO, what has enabled Kate to rise from that crowd is some great viral marketing and, perhaps, the "girl-next-door" look being the new unique/different after a parade of such truly unique/different beauties in various venues.
To be fair, my perception of Kate could change over the next 4-5 years as her face matures a bit. I think some of my bias can be attributed to her being/looking younger than the age I would consider most women to be their most beautiful (mid-20's, on average, for those that maintain that rockin' 18-yr old figure).