What makes a "good Top"?

[hungry_hole]

I've been bottoming since my 20's and I have enjoyed it tremendously. I've had several long-time fuck-buddies that have appreciated my hole, some total tops and others who really enjoy fucking and breeding a hole.

I think that in order to be a "good Top" the guy must really enjoy fucking, which in my opinion it means that he can:

• Easily get hard and stay hard
• Fuck for a long time
• Controls his orgasm

I had a fuck buddy who would fuck me for at least 30 minutes in all different positions, never losing his hard-on. And after a while of him pumping my hole he would unload. I only bottom but I'm sure I would gladly top if I could.

[NLbear]

I would agree with those three. But I would add a fourth: up for a round two or even round three.

[gingerdaddyG]

21 minutes ago, NLbear said:

I would agree with those three. But I would add a fourth: up for a round two or even round three.

Totally agree - but would add a fifth - a heavy cummer!! 💦😈

[ErosWired]

I think y’all are confusing “good” with “ideal”. I see this turning into a checklist that would disqualify 99% of the Tops out there, and make those that passed self-conscious. You want they should bring you a box of chocolates as well?

I grant you that a certain minimum threshold really needs to be met if a Top wishes to be considered an acceptable performer (an erection, for a start) but the problem with declaring what makes someone a “good” Top is that you automatically, by default, also define every other Top as a “bad” Top. (Note that putting the words in quotes doesn’t actually change the sense they impart.) The question leads us to the same unsupportable notions as any number of Topics on here that discuss “good” bottoms and “good” cumdumps.

I can’t agree that a Top who’s done after one orgasm isn’t a good Top. That’s crazy talk. It’s great if a guy can go another round, but is he undesirable as a breeder if he doesn’t? If your answer is yes, your expectations are unreasonable; the vast majority of Tops are one-and-done.

Mind you, you’re not going to hear me complain when a Top wants back in, and my current regular Top always climaxes in me three - sometimes four - times per session. Yes, he’s an excellent Top, no argument. But by the time he’s finished with my first breeding of the evening he’s already fucked me so far into the  mattress I’m spitting out springs, and if he wanted to stop there I would be just fine with that, and he would still be an outstanding Top. But he doesn’t stop.

Is a Top undesirable if he isn’t a heavy cummer? What’s your definition of heavy? The average volume of a human ejaculation is around 2.8mL - that’s just over half a teaspoon. The high end for the population at large is about 5mL. Anything over that is getting into the high-90th percentile of cum producers.

Sure, everybody can probably point to an exception to this - I’ve definitely had the floodgates opened into me before - I know how that feels. But most of the time, it’s more a case of a little going a long way. It would never occur to me to think about whether a Top was “good” or not on the basis of volume.

Maybe ‘What makes a good Top’ isn’t the best way to approach the question; maybe it would be more useful to ask ‘What makes a skilled Top’ or ‘What makes an effective Top’ or even ‘What makes an ideal Top’ - though that last one is probably less useful in that it basically asks for fantasy criteria.

[timfreo]

One who can makes me cum hands free into my chastity cage... And keep going 

[hntnhole]

What makes a good Top?

I would say it's a man who loves Hole, cares about what the bottom experiences while taking the Top's Cock, and makes sure he knows what the bottom can reasonably expect.  A trick is a trick, and a bottom shouldn't expect the fuck of his life.   A regular Breeder is something else.  and so is a friend who enjoys a sexual component to the friendship.  The way I see it, mating take at least two to accomplish, and either T or b viewing the other as merely a means by which to sate his Lusts isn't even close to fair.  How can anyone expect a stranger to know a bottom's mind when it's just a one-time thing.  Breeding is mating, and unless there's some real history involved, the expectations need to either be verbalized clearly before the men fuck, or at least communicated during the foreplay.  If judging a man before he even knows what's in our mind just isn't fair.  Maybe some Cocks are selfish - there are more selfish people populating this country than un.  This question is not answerable, since it applies only to one half of the equation.  The real question should be, what makes a good Breeding, since that would include the bare minimum of what Breeding is - at least two men sharing their Lusts for mutual pleasure.  

There are also what I would call selfish bottoms.  Once, while at my favorite fuckjoint, I was fucking one Hole, and the next Hole actually reached over and tried to pull me out of that Hole and pull me over to his Hole.  What an inconsiderate, greedy, self-absorbed prick.  Of course I skipped him.  Daydreams of this or that aren't worth the time it takes to tell about them.  It's a two-man event*, and not solely centered on one man or the other.  

It's all about sharing the Lust for ...

Cock/Hole/Sperm

*unless, of course, one is lucky enough to be invited to a group scene - which implies being one of a number of other men.

[Guest]

For me i don't have a checklist, rather, if he sees what he likes and wants to use me that makes me very happy, but I do like it when he makes me feel like his bitch and makes me know and puts me in my place both physically and verbally. he uses me and wants to come back for more i am very happy, i have successfully pleasured a top.

[BootmanLA]

28 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

the problem with declaring what makes someone a “good” Top is that you automatically, by default, also define every other Top as a “bad” Top.

Not that I disagree with the sentiment of "good" vs "ideal", but.... I don't think "good" and "bad" are binary, on/off, 1/0 type choices. In asking an opinion of something, I frequently use the construct "Good, bad, or indifferent?" to indicate the option for something that's okay, serviceable, but not really good or bad.

But indeed, starting to pile on things like "3 or more orgasms in short succession", or limiting "good tops" to those who can meet A, B, C, D, E, F, and G through S, is restricting the designation "good" far too much. In my opinion.

[ErosWired]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

Not that I disagree with the sentiment of "good" vs "ideal", but.... I don't think "good" and "bad" are binary, on/off, 1/0 type choices. In asking an opinion of something, I frequently use the construct "Good, bad, or indifferent?" to indicate the option for something that's okay, serviceable, but not really good or bad.

Usually I would agree. In this and similar cases, though, the term is used to draw a division between two groups of Tops: Those who are good Tops, and, therefore, those who are not. It becomes a binary construction in context.

Here on BZ I have observed a tendency to use phrases like “a good bottom will always do this” or “a good cumdump does that”. In this context, good signifies “genuine” or in some other exclusionary way acceptable, and is used in a way closely akin to “a real bottom” or “a true bottom”. The discussions most often revolve around strong binary opinions as to whether this or that trait qualifies one as a bona fide bottom. Since any such metric is highly subjective at best, it makes most sense to me to call it what it is - the expression of an ideal preference. Otherwise, the words begin to divide us.

[FunCheerSlut]

An erection and maintaining that erection until he finishes - is all a "good top" requires for me to be happy; no matter how long in duration his hard cock requires use of my horny holes. I enjoy taking a hard cock for even a few strokes if that's all it takes to get him emptying that nutt out (hopefully balls deep). Anything that gets in the way of getting or maintaining a hardon is a big deal breaker or red flag for me. I do love to feel an orgasm regardless of how much cum the top ejaculates.

[BootmanLA]

17 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Usually I would agree. In this and similar cases, though, the term is used to draw a division between two groups of Tops: Those who are good Tops, and, therefore, those who are not. It becomes a binary construction in context.

Fair. I forget sometimes that most people have had exactly zero coursework in logic and don't realize that the opposite of "good" is "not good", not "bad". "Not good" could and should cover a wide range of possibilities.

17 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Here on BZ I have observed a tendency to use phrases like “a good bottom will always do this” or “a good cumdump does that”. In this context, good signifies “genuine” or in some other exclusionary way acceptable, and is used in a way closely akin to “a real bottom” or “a true bottom”. The discussions most often revolve around strong binary opinions as to whether this or that trait qualifies one as a bona fide bottom. Since any such metric is highly subjective at best, it makes most sense to me to call it what it is - the expression of an ideal preference. Otherwise, the words begin to divide us.

That's why I hate almost every discussion topic that has the word "Should" in it, like "Should a bottom do X". Aside from the binary option, it's also typically mostly a pissing contest to see who can think up the most extreme thing that "real" bottoms should do, whereupon of course the usual cast of competitive characters all come forward to say of course they do that, they're lowly bottoms who must do whatever, nothing matters about what they want, blah blah blah. 

[hungry_hole]

On 10/3/2021 at 7:39 PM, ErosWired said:

I think y’all are confusing “good” with “ideal”

I meant to say that if I had a list of qualities I would definitely be a top or at least versatile because I would truly enjoy topping. Partly because I'm uncut and very sensitive I tend to cum too quickly whereas if I lasted for a log time, I would probably enjoy fucking.

It would be interesting to hear from men reading this discussion and who enjoy topping and consider themselves a top or versatile.

On 10/3/2021 at 8:09 PM, hntnhole said:

I was fucking one Hole, and the next Hole actually reached over and tried to pull me out of that Hole and pull me over to his Hole.

Someone that can moves from hole to hole without losing the erection or shooting his load is one reason to be a top or versatile/top. I have a weakness for taking a load from a bottom so at the sauna I would usually stay up late and wait when cumdumps and other bottoms were going home  and tried getting the9ir loads. They usually didn't last long and some had half-erection and cum almost right away.

I can't imagine someone with reliable and long-lasting erections and who could fuck holes for a long time without cumming, and not wanting to top.

[phukhole]

For ME, a good top is a man who loves hole. He's got to want to fuck it or finger it or eat it or fist it or anything as long as he's in that hole.  He may be selfish and just want to shoot his load. He may be tender and make love to the hole. He may go all night or he may be a quick cummer. They're all good in my eyes as long as they can fuck and can cum (though I have a couple of tops that don't cum in me, but fuck the living hell out of me each and every time).  I'm not even hung up on the size of his dick.  I've had great fucks by average cocks and horrible fucks from large cocks. A good top wants to fuck. I guess it's as simple as that for me.

[DarkroomTaker]

All Tops are awesome and I thank you all for fucking me.

I tend to take it as it comes.

So thanks Tops, you are all great in my eyes and Ass. 

[downtownswallow]

If a Top is too quick to cum, either from lack of control or no talent, it'll be quick and done for me.  I need a Top that can last or cum multiple times....with my attention of course.  We fuck....stop...start again...rest...I get bred....rest a bit...I stuck him back to full erection...repeat.