Hazel Kitty - W2 - Not that impressive in my book

[Malvolio]

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

Cost: £150 for one hour - punt took place last week.

Communications: I made the initial booking through Adultwork, then sent her a text asking for the postcode on the day, which I got in plenty of time.  My habit is to print off a map of the area and take that with me.  Got off the tube with 10 minutes to spare and asked for the address - I got a text back with the name of the apartment and postcode.  As my punting phone is not a smartphone, that wasn't much use to me.  Four texts, one phone call, a lengthy wander around the W2 area and 15 minutes later I finally got a street name and number from her.

Location: Serviced apartment block in between Lancaster Gate and Paddington stations.  Not a place I'd visited before, but the apartment Hazel had booked turned out to be the smallest apartment I've ever been in - claustrophobes would feel very uncomfortable here.  Not enough room to dry yourself in the bathroom, and a small bed side on to the wall.

Looks: Reasonable enough, but in truth slightly disappointing given the build up she's had on here.  Rather large nose and her complexion wasn't that great.

Figure: She scores very well here - the pictures on her AW profile give a spot-on indication of her body.

Services:  Started with some DFK - I know that all WGs are going through the motions but she wasn't able to project the convincing GFE that I'm after with her kissing.  Moved on to oral (giving and receiving) and her blowjob is very good - she was willing to take instructions, which is always a plus for me.  She refused to take a finger when I was going down on her though.  Finished with a facial which she was happy to take.   Had sex in a few of positions for round two, but due to the small size of the bed I was struggling to find a comfortable position and in the end couldn't come again.  I would class her attitude throughout the punt as very good.

Would I visit again:  No - £150 is as much as I'd be willing to pay for an hour's punt, and for that I'd hope to get a top experience with a WG I found very attractive.  I got an OK punt with a WG I found fairly attractive, hence the neutral rating.

[Tony_Red]

Thanks for a very good review. The bit about the room being small is great to know for lanky gits like me - Part of the reason why I haven't been back to see Khloe.

Looks are subjective, but who looks better Hazel or Ameera? I see you have seen both.

I originally planned to see both, but with new ladies appearing all the time, I might skip them both. Not sure at the mo. Thanks!

[mrhappypants]

One of the benefits of seeing a WG who has been heavily reviewed is that it gives you an insight into the accuracy of review(er)s.  In Hazel's case, where she has drawn reviews from some of the same group of punters, who write multiple reviews of the same group of girls, and where some of those girls screen punters who will only write positive reviews, I think you are likely to find this particularly informative.

Dave

[Mysterion]

One of the benefits of seeing a WG who has been heavily reviewed is that it gives you an insight into the accuracy of review(er)s. 

I disagree, just because a group of reviewers found a WGs appearance and performance good and you didn't doesn't make their review "inaccurate". Maybe they like different things or maybe the WG was having a bad day when she saw you. At best following in the footsteps of other punters can give you an idea if they have similar tastes to you, so that when they do a new review you take more notice than if it were from someone who didn't share your tastes.

[vt]

Re. accuracy of reviews...rarely are punts overwhelmingly positive or overwhelmingly negative, usually a mix of both aspects.

So, I always try and think of the most disappointing thing(s) about the punt and mention those as well as all the most appealing aspects, sometimes the punt will still rate overall positive for me, but at least guys are informed as to any negative aspects that they might feel are dealbreakers for them.

[loopy]

Agreed with OP. Saw Hazel years ago and though service was great, facially didn't do it for me. I think she has a "sister" who also works , kylie flirt..?

[lewishamguy]

Agreed with OP. Saw Hazel years ago and though service was great, facially didn't do it for me. I think she has a "sister" who also works , kylie flirt..?

It was ivy, her sister but now seems to be disappeared from AW. External Link/Members Only

They're both Hungarian/Aussie mixed.

[mrhappypants]

I disagree, just because a group of reviewers found a WGs appearance and performance good and you didn't doesn't make their review "inaccurate". Maybe they like different things or maybe the WG was having a bad day when she saw you.

So you don't think it is cause for question if a reviewer gives a completely one sided opinion or misses out/downplays obvious short falls?

Yes, you and I are going to have to disagree.

Re. accuracy of reviews...rarely are punts overwhelmingly positive or overwhelmingly negative, usually a mix of both aspects.

So, I always try and think of the most disappointing thing(s) about the punt and mention those as well as all the most appealing aspects, sometimes the punt will still rate overall positive for me, but at least guys are informed as to any negative aspects that they might feel are dealbreakers for them.

I think doing this makes the reviews more meaningful and useful.

Agreed with OP. Saw Hazel years ago and though service was great, facially didn't do it for me. I think she has a "sister" who also works , kylie flirt..?

I thought her sister had gone back to Australia and interested to know if she is still around.  I still have to tick my "sisters" box. 

Dave

[Mysterion]

So you don't think it is cause for question if a reviewer gives a completely one sided opinion or misses out/downplays obvious short falls?

Cause for question? That depends on the situation. Let's take DFK as an example. If a reviewer says DFK was good and you thought it was average or bad doesn't mean that they are misleading you, just that they have different standards or (as suggested previously) maybe the girl was having an off day with you. Likewise if they don't mention DFK at all, then maybe DFK isn't their thing so they didn't initiate it.

Of course it is possible that someone could be a deluded fluffy and is blind to a WGs faults, but I think it's far more likely that it's just a case of different strokes for different folks. YMMV

[mrhappypants]

Cause for question? That depends on the situation.

Hmmmn, I am aware we are off topic but, if I read your answer correctly, I think you are saying that a reviewer can write a totally one sided review or miss out / down play obvious shortfalls in service and you would still not necessarily regard that as grounds to question the review.

As you say, my view varies.

Dave

[nervyfooker]

I disagree, just because a group of reviewers found a WGs appearance and performance good and you didn't doesn't make their review "inaccurate"...

i have found that while i generally trust seasoned punters' observation of services
provided, i am much more skeptical about descriptions of looks.
i reckon quite a few mark too highly,are easily pleased or in some cases would fuck anything
that wasn't a whale.obviously its all subjective...

anyway i found this review very useful, thanks.

[Malvolio]

Thanks for a very good review. The bit about the room being small is great to know for lanky gits like me - Part of the reason why I haven't been back to see Khloe.

Looks are subjective, but who looks better Hazel or Ameera? I see you have seen both.

I originally planned to see both, but with new ladies appearing all the time, I might skip them both. Not sure at the mo. Thanks!

For me, Ameera is definitely better looking.

[Malvolio]

Cause for question? That depends on the situation. Let's take DFK as an example. If a reviewer says DFK was good and you thought it was average or bad doesn't mean that they are misleading you, just that they have different standards or (as suggested previously) maybe the girl was having an off day with you. Likewise if they don't mention DFK at all, then maybe DFK isn't their thing so they didn't initiate it.

Of course it is possible that someone could be a deluded fluffy and is blind to a WGs faults, but I think it's far more likely that it's just a case of different strokes for different folks. YMMV

I agree with this - any judgment of a WG will necessarily be subjective and any single review cannot cover all bases.  However, when reviewing I try to mention things that other punters may want to know, and hope others will do the same.

[Tony_Red]

Thanks v much. You just saved me 150 quid. For that kinda money i'd really want a very nice face and good service or a decent face + exceptional service. I will skip Hazel and at some point try seeing Ameera.

[lewishamguy]

She used to charge £130/hr. 

[jimmycallum]

This review is disappointing I saw her 2 years ago and have been trying to see her again (she never picks up her phone), I think she may get bumped down the list.

Malvolio - you really need a smartphone if you can afford £150 on a punt you can afford to have a smart phone with googlemaps.
one time a wg sent me a post code when i was nearby she sent me another post code 10 minutes away...in an area i did not know.

[lewishamguy]

....
Malvolio - you really need a smartphone if you can afford £150 on a punt you can afford to have a smart phone with googlemaps.
one time a wg sent me a post code when i was nearby she sent me another post code 10 minutes away...in an area i did not know.

Have you used sat-nav device? I think it's very good for punting and can locate address more faster than phone and even if prossies give you wrong post code but sat-nav will find you the right address. Also it's free to use, no additional internet needed, easy to carry.

[Dreyfus]

I agree 100% with the reviewer.  I was one of the early ones to visit her (and to be, quite favourably, cross-reviewed by her  ) but I never found her special look-wise (I was tempted to walk) and was subsequently amused by the rave reviews she has been getting.  Which fact then puts a lot of the other rave reviews here and on AW into context and to be taken with a significant degree of scepticism, at least from my point of view

[Yeboahsleftfoot]

She was the good in my good, bad & ugly breakdown post recently, was underwhelmed after a big, review induced build up.

"Well known hotel venue in West London, think a foot and a half above shepherd’s knee. Parked up, got room number and breezed past reception. Door opened to reveal what looked like a great body topped by a face that on first impressions promoted a feeling of hmmm?, pretty eyes, big nose, pouty mouth but not a face that would get heads turning in the street. A dark Eastern European heritage permeates her look. She’s not got great skin, not attractive and although her body looks awesome, her tits & arse are squidgy.

Can’t fault services delivered or attitude, Lots of kissing, deep throat, reverse oral, fucking in multiple positions and 3 pops in 90 minutes £200.

Overall, good with a large dollop of meh."

[mrhappypants]

Key things with Hazel for me are that she is a native English speaker with a slim attractive busty figure and enthusiastic service, swallow included.   I thought she was good value at £120 but I have not been to see her £150 for the hour. A shortening service list and her looks simply do not justify this rate in my opinion.

Check out who she does duos with and draw your own conclusions.

Dave

[Nagilum]

thank you for the review OP.

[PeterTheGreek]

Is there anyone who's seen both Hazel and her sister (back in the days when she was working) and could suggest how they compare facially? I ask because Ivy's profile used to have face pics and I'd certainly regard her as attractive, a good 7/10 perhaps. If Hazel's in that league I'd take that as a positive. Thanks.

[Sir Lancealot]

Thanks for the review. Certainly gone down on my HL and had been thinking of making a booking.

[iwtc]

Wondering if she has moved?  When i saw her she was in W2 as well, but the room was quite large.

[Mendra]

Had hot fuck with her in the shower omg... Took all like a feeding bottle! Too bird one not to be missed. Must say she is a dream come true. Thing is she never has her AW green lights on. But has great comms.

[Alvin]

I tried to see her but although she read my message she didn't respond.  I'd kept her in my hot list but for various reasons hadn't tried again.  Looking at her free pictures her tits do look quite saggy.

[asif]

I had tried to see her twice a few years ago, before moving to Edinburgh.

I thought I missed a gem, looks like I saved my self £120 (her rate at the time).

I too have learnt (after wasting £300-£400) to take reviews with a (big) pinch of salt.