Category: Dating

No Endgame, Equilibrium Maybe

by Runner, posted in Dating, Theory

Very recently Magnum moved to New York City. We had dinner tonight and talked about several topics. One of them inspired this post.

I made a comment about his recent post “There is No Endgame”.

I was concerned that people online were misunderstanding the idea of “endgame.” Sounds like I care too much about what people online think. I don’t really care that much. However, it is important when dealing with impressionable minds of men who will be going out and talking to girls to communicate clearly and encourage them to know what they want, such that they have a chance of getting it. Most people don’t know what they want.

Personally, I am interested in having a family, though there is no guarantee that it will happen for me. Yes, I could knock up a girl and reproduce, but I want to do more than that, I want to create a family and thrive.

That sounds like I’m pursuing an endgame get a wife, make a baby, the end. Game over.

Krauser wants a wife. Roosh wants a wife. Actually a lot of guys want a wife.

I agree with Magnum on this that there is no endgame. A wife and/or family is not the endgame. We all die alone. If you get into a relationship and that grows into a family, you still run the risk of a woman losing attraction for you and freeing herself from the situation in a way that an American lawyer gets paid (by you) to make painful and expensive (even if you’re not married – California laws are that bad). There is no end to that risk – you signed up for the relationship maintenance contract.

When Magnum says “So I’m at peace with being a player forever.  As a man you have to be able to bring new women into your life on an ongoing basis, and pair-bond with them as you see fit.” this is certainly a valid option. And it seems to be a common interpretation of “No Endgame.”

However, I think it’s such an important topic, I wanted to share another perspective. My perspective.

Equilibrium is not “Men and Women are Equal!” Equilibrium is the balance between the male seduction and protection and the female submission and support. I’m not going to call it ying and yang, but I could.

If you are able to build a relationship with a rough equilibrium, then the amount of work needed to maintain the relationship is significantly reduced. Not going to call it easy mode because relationships are hard, but building it from an equilibrium is easier. How it starts is how it goes. You end up putting in about as much energy as you get out of it, give or take. No resentment builds, and you get the benefits of being in a relationship. Neither spouse is a drag upon the other. 1 + 1 can equal 3.

Equilibrium is related to ideas of the 3rd level of seduction, as described in a great post article Nash wrote last year:

“What do I need to do to make her feel beautiful? What does she need to relax? What can’t she see about herself that would make her glow? What makes her feel sexy? What opens her heart? What fantasies does she need to explore? What does she need to feel to have the experience of a lifetime? What makes her melt? What does she need to feel such that she can shine for me? What does she need to feel so she can surrender to me… and really let herself “go?” What would the experience be that would make her more than eager to come back and do it all again?

And it is illustrative to cite a few quotes by a woman, Patricia Albere, from that same post describing how a woman knows or feels when equilibrium is and isn’t there:

“If he takes you someplace you want to go, then you can surrender to him. A lot of men don’t know where they are going. They’re not that attuned to you. They don’t necessarily care how it is for you, they are way too selfish. There is something that just doesn’t happen.”
— Patricia Albere

“You can tell that a lot of times men just want what they want, and they want you to show up in a way that they can get off on the whole situation, and it’s not too much of a turn on for women. You kind of know if the man is actually really connected and wants something to happen for both of you.”
— Patricia Albere

A woman in equilibrium is also exploring ways of supporting you, trusting you, surrendering and submitting to you, pleasing you, opening up to you, and taking care of you. She makes you sandwiches, so to speak.

Nash’s post goes deeper than I want to for purposes of this post, but it’s worth reading for a deeper understanding of seduction.

I’ve had 2 relationships built with equilibrium.

How does one build a relationship with equilibrium?

First, let me tell you a personal story to provide some context:

I did nightgame some years ago, and occasionally I would have an intense lover connection with a girl I met at a bar or a club, and occasionally I would experience a non-lover connection from a girl where she is interested in me for whatever reason, but the sex was more… …dutiful. The reasons women decide to have sex are all over the map.

I also tried some online game, and girls online seem to be sometimes looking for lovers or sometimes boyfriends and they are optimizing from among a wide selection of online men and probably aren’t even that happy with the results, and in NYC women will struggle with getting commitment from a guy. My experience with online dating was lackluster. I was able to meet and date and seduce girls but almost all of the sex was the sort of dutiful sex, a version of “keep you around because you are an interesting option” maintenance sex rather than the lover mode of “I desire you” sex.

My experience in daygame has provided me with almost exclusively lover sex from the girls I have met. The girls that make it through my filter really want me and want to please me and the sex is good. I work hard and approach a lot, but I’m happy with the results, and I see more improvement in my future.

That lover connection is the spark that creates conditions where equilibrium can happen.

Start with that connection as lovers, she is really attracted to you and has raw sexual desire for you. That can happen superficially and it is called limerence, but at least in my mind’s eye, I’m talking more about a deeper level of seduction (level 3), where the man makes her shine and protects her, and she supports and pleases him.

So anyway, you start off as lovers in a deep level of seduction. You enjoy her, your psychologies and social class backgrounds are matched enough that you don’t find each other annoying (or mismatched enough that you find each other exotic), and maybe even enjoy talking and spending significant time together or your love languages match well. If the things you want in life are similar (babies being the biggest one usually), you have an approximate equilibrium. The man can choose to commit to the woman (who, not always, but usually hopes to convert him from a lover into a lover and a provider – the big score) and even get married and/or make a baby.

This here is the point that a number of guys might consider endgame, but it’s actually just a (possibly temporary) equilibrium.

One can also get married and make a baby without being in equilibrium. Sometimes people figure it out and grow together and sometimes they don’t and/or they grow apart. You can imagine how it plays out.

Equilibrium can break down if it’s not maintained. It can happen in many different ways: some guys relax and play video games now that they don’t have to spend time chasing girls and are getting regular (perhaps just dutiful) sex from a girl they like enough and who puts up with them. Or he loses his job and she resents him while she works to keep the household afloat. Or she gets fat from eating her feelings and he loses attraction for her.

Equilibrium requires work. The guy is not free from the responsibility of leading and staying attractive as best they can, or even being a good father if they have kids. That’s another side of “there is no endgame.” You don’t get to rest. You might get to rest when you are dead – but I’m not even certain about that.

Women have responsibilities too, they should remain attractive as best they can (despite time and nature and gravity working against them), they should be supportive, and may have significant responsibilities as a mother. They shoulder some of the responsibility for maintaining equilibrium, but even at their most equal, it’s still probably at least 51% the man’s responsibility to maintain this equilibrium.

So back to Magnum, when he says he is “at peace with being a player forever.” He’s expressing that he can get close enough to achieving that equilibrium on his terms and doesn’t have to lock it in with exclusivity or marriage. He can have relationships for the timeframes and intimacy level he wants. He has the skills to make that happen, so it’s a good choice for him, until he changes his mind and wants something else.

It’s possible to maintain the equilibrium and have a family without locking it in with exclusivity and marriage. However, society isn’t there yet, and there are many cringeworthy examples of attempts to do so provided by new age communes and fringe religious groups around the world.

Yes, the legal system discriminates against men in marriage. Most men are not able to choose beforehand the jurisdiction their marriage would be litigated in in the event of a divorce (divorce laws in all 50 states of the US all vary, as do countries in the world), and even if they could, judges can throw it out. So yeah, there is significant risk of marriage. That’s not news. However, starting in equilibrium and putting in the work to maintain that equilibrium helps manage that risk – and gives you a fair shot. If you have some basic game and frame control, go to the gym and take care of your health, have a mission or even just a job, you’re probably going to do better than most guys and have a lower (but not zero!) chance of divorce, and if you do get divorced, you have the skills to start over again. Your odds are better than the even odds of divorce statistics, but it is not riskless.

For me, there is no endgame either. I am looking for an equilibrium to create a family and I think it may make sense to lean on the traditional structure that society provides (an example being a marriage in a jurisdiction that is not as dysfunctional as the United States or Anglo countries), but I also recognize the responsibility that I will have to maintain that equilibrium possibly until I am dead. That’s my interpretation of “No Endgame.” Maybe I won’t find it. Maybe I will one day come to a realization similar to what Magnum has realized about himself. We’ll see.

Daygame is Freedom or What’s Wrong with Online Game

by Runner, posted in Dating

Daygame is Freedom or What’s Wrong with Online Game

Lately I consider myself something of a daygame purist. I just want to do daygame and avoid nightgame and online game because I don’t enjoy them or think they are a good use of my time.

I’ve done nightgame, I’ve done online game, I’ve had my longest relationship with a girl from my social circle, and I’ve spent the last few years doing daygame. Daygame is my favorite, it has made me a better man and I am approaching satisfaction with the quality and results I am getting from it.

Years ago, I remember when I first read “The Game” and went out to some bars and clubs during the next few weekends, did some approaches, and made out with a nice blonde nurse. I thought I had solved women. She texted me back once and then ghosted me. Oops.

Then there was a period of time where I was going out to nightgame 7 days a week. I was dating some pretty awesome girls that I met at bars and clubs. There were 2 girls I met during this time that I dated for a few months, and looking back, they were pretty great girls and if I was more mature, maybe they would be my wife right now. Instead I wanted to go out and experience the excitement of nightlife. The possibility of more and/or higher quality experiences made those options less attractive. I had some really good nights and weeks even where I was getting the signals that I was ‘top guy.’ Brief episodes, but it was something. Eventually I got tired of going out, drinking, talking to girls – it became a chore. I just didn’t enjoy night game anymore.

My longest relationship was a girl I met through my social circle. We started talking about a topic and she was fascinated by me and pursued me. There was a jealousy plotline during the seduction and everything. I broke up with her because she didn’t ever want kids (which to me was a dealbreaker) and I was moving to New York – a city filled with beautiful women, so I was thinking “I’ll just find another one.” Again, the the possibility of more experiences or ‘getting a better relationship deal’ made that relationship option less attractive.

New York City is a more competitive dating environment that where I was coming from, so I spent a bit of time regretting breaking up with my ex-girlfriend – she’s smoking hot and was really into me. I sometimes wonder what would have happened if she came with me and I was somehow able to convince her to have kids – too late now, she’s gone and married another guy, someone she can not have kids with.

However, shortly after my arrival in New York City I thought Tinder was amazing. Then they (Tinder) kept dicking around with the algorithms and extorting money from men, the women became flakier and flakier, more Venmo and IG handles appearing in their profiles. At some point it stopped working for me – I had months long dry spells, and occasionally got lucky, but I felt like I was at the mercy of the algorithm. I never felt like the possibility of more and/or higher quality experiences was in my power, online game felt like some sort of degenerate gamble – gamble is the right word because of the unknown algorithmic nature behind how people are displayed and how randomly they would match with you, and what are the odds of it being a bot. Hope is not a strategy. No one is coming to save you.

So being the renegade that I am, I started doing daygame. It was hard at first, but I felt backed into a corner by online game and my heart wasn’t in nightgame anymore. The demons were telling me that daygame was my only option. The only way out is through.

I think I got lucky my first month, I started in August and fashion week in NYC happens in early September each year. I got a number from a 19 year old fashion model that “Vogue” magazine called the “it” girl of the year. I teased her about something relating to robots taking over the world and she laughed and I got her number. I texted her and she gave me a reply – a single laughing emoji, and then I never heard from her again. However, it was just the mere hint of a top guy signal, a flake of gold proving out the mine, and that convinced me I was on the right track. Quality seemed obtainable and within my reach now. I redoubled my efforts.

You can read some of my other posts for how long it took me to brute force the learning curve for daygame (spoiler: it was an average of 5 approaches a day for a few years), and fast forward to the present day where I am dating two girls I met on the street 6-8 weeks ago. I am still going out and approaching because of the possibility of more and/or higher quality experiences. Consistently approaching also helps episodes of being ‘top guy’ last for months at a time. I’m looking for a girl that makes me not want to go out and approach other girls, i.e. she compares favorably to going out and approaching. Perhaps such a superb woman does not exist. Perhaps we as men always want some new strange. If so, I may never stop searching for her. I owe it to myself to try anyway. Daygame makes that possible.

Subsequently, as I have gotten better at daygame, a local NYC daygamer @covadg regularly tries to drag me out to some bar or club for some nightgame. I have gone several times, and each time I have been disappointed with the quality of girls in bars. I’d rather be out on the street. The possibility of more and/or higher quality experiences makes the girls in the bar/club less attractive than what I can meet on the street. I just didn’t feel like it was a good use of my time.

Daygame gives you immediate feedback and has a tight feedback loop. You learn a lot in just a few minutes of conversation with a girl you are attracted to – it is good for quality, and you may encounter quantity during the process too. If you slum it in daygame, and date a girl below the standard of what you want, the street will compare favorably and you will go back out and approach and improve naturally.

Nightgame has similarly immediate feedback, and you can seduce faster (same night), but the quality is often lower. Fine if you want to put numbers up on the board, but quantity is not quality. It is possible to slum it for a night or for a short period of time. The repetition of going to the bar/club and accepting the limitations of the environment can cause a pattern of slumming it and prevent you from improving.

Quantity has a quality all its own.

Joseph Stalin (discussing Russian soldiers vs German troops in WWII)

Online game is so passive and algorithmic based, the girls are liking or rejecting you initially based on your picture and a blurb of text.

You can get some quantity and maybe quality online, but you have no control over how much or how often. It’s a degenerate gamble. You have no guarantee of more experiences or higher quality experiences if you continue. Online can also breed laziness and I know a number of guys who are most definitely slumming it by taking whatever they are given by the great algorithmic matching engine, and that is why they don’t improve.

The feedback is arbitrary and the display of potential matches is controlled by an algorithm. It’s tyranny.

Definition of Tyranny: Cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.

I’m an American. Our forefathers didn’t accept tyranny. They took action and started a war with England over a 2% tax and declared independence shortly thereafter:

Don’t accept tyranny. Daygame is freedom from Tyranny. Follow the London Daygame Model if you love quality, choice, and freedom (and yes, I get the irony of American style freedoms granted by a model named after London, England). Or do nightgame if you agree with Stalin that quantity is a quality of sorts and/or you find it to be enjoyable or a good use of your time or you eagerly accept the tyranny of bouncers at the door of your favorite establishment. Do online game as a last resort – a subsistence ration in a Stockholm prison of your own choosing – a welfare distribution of sex for when you’re down and out.

To address the inevitable pearl clutching types who will no doubt feel personally attacked that I am hating on the use of online game. You don’t have to care. Keep slumming it. I wrote this for my own amusement, I don’t care what you or anyone does. Do online game if you want. I don’t care. Just don’t tell me how awesome it is – I don’t believe you.

You’re free to slum it any way you like and whenever you want, you don’t need to justify it to anyone. However, I have zero sympathy for guys who aren’t satisfied with the quality they get online or at night. If they are, great!

And your point is…?

If you slum it in daygame, the opportunities available on the street will force you to approach something you want more. If you slum it in nightgame, well, you’re making the best of a situation with some limitations and conditions (spatial, temporal, social, logistical, financial), but it’s just for a night or a short period of time until you go out again and try with a different set of limitations and conditions. If you do online game, you are almost certainly slumming it. This is why daygame makes us better men, it holds us to a higher standard of the women we choose (call it the standard of freedom), and naturally forces us to not settle or slum it with girls we will have sex with but wish were better in some ways.

Update 2/2/2020

After another day of thinking about it I had a few more thoughts to add:

Women rarely know what they are attracted to outright, and it also depends on their moods. With online game, you’re giving girls too much credit for knowing what they want, most of them don’t have any clue so they’re gonna guess they want to guy between a certain age of a certain height and they may or may not be attracted to him – his vibe and dominance and how he is in person will matter significantly, as will her mood in the moment.

When you’re on the street, approaching her one on one, you have a chance of being the most interesting guy in her world – you’re not competing with anyone else directly in that moment if she’s open to meeting someone. When you are in a bar or a club, you have a chance to be the most interesting guy in the room, which might go well for you, since you are only competing against other guys in the room. When you are online, you have a chance to be the most interesting man in her queue – which for any girl online is hundreds.

And actually, since a large percentage of girls in major cities are online, even in daygame and at bars and clubs you are competing with her online queue. I have no data to support this theory but I suspect that 6s and 7s are more likely to invest in online dating than 8s and 9s, who don’t need to (unless they have some psychological deficiency that makes them need more attention and validation). There are some hot girls online, but some are definitely not online, and those hot ‘offline’ girls are actually more receptive to your approach because you are not having to compete with their queue. I think quality online is lower than nightgame which is itself lower than daygame because of a law similar to supply and demand.

Daygame generally has a higher yield of quality when you get to a certain skill level, and I think that efficiency appeals to guys on the wrong side of about 28 or so with some online game and nightgame experience – they are old enough to recognize the folly of youth and appreciate that time is valuable and quality is important.

Bond Analogy

ROI is easy to compute in dollars, and if all notches were equal it would be simple to compare daygame, nightgame and online game. But for most men, the quality of women matters, analogous to bond ratings:

This will only make sense if you understand basic finance – apologies to the 80% of you for whom this will whoosh over your head

With limited capital, time and attention to invest, most of what you sift through in online game is going to be speculative subprime grade. You can still get a return with online game, just like you can still get a return in subprime bonds, but you may not want to hold them long term as they may end up worthless. Nightgame can land you more medium grade, better quality, but still with some risk of default. Daygame is looking for younger hotter tighter, the bond world equivalent of deals in AAA Prime bonds, most of which are fairly priced, but occasionally you’ll find a deal and it may be a good investment. Diversify your portfolio. If a guy does only online game, or only night game, he has a concentrated portfolio risk in risky assets with a higher chance of default and it is unlikely he has much experience with younger hotter tighter AAA Bonds or ability to invest in them or even recognize deals when they appear. If he only does daygame, he is concentrating his risk in higher quality bonds – which is admittedly conservative. As people age they need to take less portfolio risk and become more conservative, focus on preserving investment capital and investing in higher quality bonds. Another reason that Daygame often seems to seem like a good idea when guys hit about 28. Also could be the reason that guys like Krauser and Roosh with a lot of experience are only looking for AAA YHT girls for wives and making babies – who knows if they’ll find it; AAA guys attract AAA girls.

Mistakes Nice Guys Make and How to Fix Them

by Runner, posted in Dating, Street Approach, Theory

I started recording audio of my sets last month. I use the Olympus VP-10, it cost $80 but was worth it. The quality is good, the battery life is long, and it is USB so it’s easy to transfer to my computer. I use quicktime to trim audio files down to my approaches. It’s a little cringe sometimes to hear the mistakes you make in set, but it gives you more feedback which speeds up the learning process. I should have done it sooner.

Anyway, as I was listening to my sets, and a few instadates, sometimes sharing them with wings for their feedback (and roasting), a number of both tiny and glaring nice guy behaviors started to appear as patterns, reminding me of one of the fundamental mantras of game:

Patterns emerge over time.

Mystery

Nice guy behaviors can be more articulately defined as polite yet undeserved pedestalization taught by society – parents who mean well, hollywood, bad advice from girls, etc.

The opposite of nice guy behavior is push-pull behavior. You’re not flat and boring, you’re shifting sands, keeping her on her toes. This gets her attention. She notices. She may start to feel attraction.

I’m just going to rattle off my list that I’ve been compiling for a few weeks now.

  • Saying “sorry” upon stopping her or anything that implies her time is worth something, e.g. Mr. V’s “really quickly” also has this problem
  • Saying “wow” instead of “ok” or “fair enough” when she tells you something. You don’t have to be so easily impressed. Or so reactive. You stopped her, remember?
  • Not teasing properly, and just complimenting her. You have to take back the compliment or you are subtly putting her on a pedestal.
  • Stacking with subsequent compliments is bad. If she doesn’t take the compliment well or corrects you, you must throw it back at her with a push (credit to @Mr.V Daygame) “I’m not French” “Darn, I wanted you to join my pantomime club.”
  • Letting a conversation drone on. “She will let you be as boring as you can accidentally make it.” –@Mr.V Daygame
  • Not setting a sexual enough frame, more bluntly stated as “hiding your dick” and you can spike and compliment her legs, her eyes, her hair, etc.
  • Testing the sexualization by stepping in when the opportunity presents itself. If she unconsciously steps back, that tells you it’s more friendly or she has a bf or isn’t comfortable yet. If she takes it, that’s almost universally a good sign.
  • Not challenging her. No is a good thing to say, but challenging her makes you stand out. The main point is to show you don’t take her too seriously. Taking her at face value – she’s used to that, she expects it. When you challenge her, she notices it because you’re different. It also conveys subtly that you might be equal or higher status which gets her attention.
  • Accepting her frame. I recently lost a frame by talking about fur on a girls coat. “It’s fake fur” was her response. I talked about fake leather in her shoes and accused her of being a vegan. Not bad, but I fell into her frame. She was a Brazilian model I stopped on a cold day, and while she enjoyed my stop and teasing, after I lost the frame, she was suddenly cold enough to have to go on her way.
  • Asking too many questions in a row. Usually girls “have to go” after you start interviewing them. Similarly, if you stack 2-3 times, and she corrects you each time but doesn’t really hook, continuing to try is just cringe.
  • Being too thirsty. Being too eager is often the opposite of hiding your dick. There is a balance. I don’t really have this problem during approaches, but I have been that guy over text, pushing too hard or too soon for a meetup, bending over backwards to schedule something, double texting, texting more lines of text than she does.
  • Accepting bad behavior. Continuing to provide attention after a girl mistreats you (doesn’t agree to date requests for a week or two – no one is that busy, doesn’t show up – explanation or not), etc.
  • Apologizing. Most of the time you don’t need to. Err on the side of not apologizing. “I feel bad for you…” is more effective. On a related note, I find myself correcting girls who over apologize – “you don’t need to apologize for that” (Mr.V, after reading this, said it’s better to say “You gotta stop apologizing” and I agree that is more direct and probably better) and it usually feels like the right thing to do, probably because I get annoyed with people (men and women) who apologize too much.

Overexplaining

Overexplaining was one of the biggest things I was doing wrong. That’s why it gets its own list. I was going into too much depth about my vivid experiences, clever reasoning and imaginative ideas. Being clever and imaginative are great qualities but they need to be streamlined for seduction. You get some points for having it, but too much of anything and she will get bored. @jimmy_jambone in his interview with Rivelino said something like “When on a date the game is 10% and the rest is just being normal.”

  • Explaining your logical and reasoning too much, instead just describe decisions and accomplishments/achievements. Another way of describing this is informative communication vs direct communication. She feels your leadership and success and feels safe when you make decisions and stick to them and communicate it directly (a testament to the strength of your frame). Explaining too much signals investment in converting her, which implies you are not as secure in your frame. It is also informative communication and more simply, she will just get bored. Boring is bad.
  • Overdoing achievements and status and job success can also fall into the trap mentioned immediately above. Girls hate it when a guy won’t shut up about how successful he is. I actually downplay some of my success, and I’m experimenting to figure out the right amount to present so she recognizes I’m successful, but it doesn’t come across as overexplaining to prove it to her.
  • Passion sharing is good. Overexplaining is bad. There is a balance between them. It’s unlikely that a girl is likely to truly share your passion, and if she does, that’s great, but it’s not that valuable in the grand scheme of seduction (often it is conversational quicksand); you should seduce her first and then talk more about that shared passion after consummation. She more than likely wants to know that you have one, and that you’re authentic and not full of shit. Talk about a passion of yours enough, but not so much that it seems like you’re trying to convert her to your pokemon religion, as going too deep into a passion might even come across as autism.
  • Explaining yourself at all. Instead of “I just had to come talk to you” or “I was just curious about you”, I liked it is the only explanation you need. She doesn’t care much for your explanation – she will ask for it if she wants it – usually the only explanation I need to provide comes in the form of “wait, where did you see me”, “back there” *point*.
  • One common overexplanation I would use in set is when I run out of things to say sometimes, I try to buy some more time with an explanation “that’s all I got” which would sometimes create the vacuum and get her talking. Stronger is “that’s all the attention I can give you” or just using silence without calling it out (riskier in a street stop as her momentum might flare up again).

There is a chance that trimming away all of these nice guy behaviors makes you too smooth, or too brutish. That’s probably a good problem to have, I’m not there yet.

By fixing these things and becoming unconsciously competent in them, you are also much less likely to slide back into being a beta if you do get into a relationship. Holding your frame, keeping her on her toes, prevents her from getting bored and keeps the spice going in the relationship and keeps the sexy times rolling.

One other thing that happened as I went through this process of trimming out nice guy behaviors is I became much less tolerable to girls I had been “friends” with. I’ve been friends with a few girls for something like 10 years, they’re too old for me to be interested in dating them. I don’t ask them for advice or even talk much about my life because they get triggered when I talk about dating a girl much younger than them, and if I do anything wrong with regards to seducing a girl and ask for advice (like when I escalated too quickly without pumping the breaks on a nice German girl in July and she promptly left of my apartment) they take the girls side over mine. One of them literally said “you’re an asshole that was just trying to fuck [the German girl]” whereas I had genuinely liked that German girl. Haven’t spoken to that “friend” since. I don’t need that kind of energy in my life. I actually wonder if being friends with girls is just being accepting and tolerant of their bad behavior (most of the time – I am sure there are exceptions, I don’t care to explain further). When I started recognizing it in daygame, I started recognizing it in other areas of my life.

Daygame taught and continues to reinforce all this. Nightgame and online game didn’t. Do daygame. Or don’t. I don’t actually care what you do. No one is coming to save you (my favorite mantra whenever I feel approach anxiety).

Viva daygame.

My Notes on Torero’s ‘What to do on a Date A to Z’ Video (RIP)

by Runner, posted in Dating, Theory

So Tom Torero took everything down, theory being that some uncalibrated guy in Scotland got arrested for aggressively hounding girls for their number and got 2 years jail time. WTF UK legal system. Also, why do your judges wear wigs?

These types of unfortunate events are why you must let girls go quickly if they’re not into it, which, in my experience, causes them to crack a smile – they recognize you are calibrated enough to let them go and leave them alone after their subtle IOD (or a not so subtle NYC IOD) and they are able to resume their life, with a touch of validation from your tease/compliment. Maybe next time you or someone else opens them they will give you their number or they’ll be in a talkative mood. Leave the girl better than you found her.

Anyway, Tom (whom Nash has called out as being sneaky) freaked out and took everything down. I have no idea how aggressive the journalists and law enforcement and other totalitarian elements have become in Britain because of Brexit or Bojo, so it may have been the right move for him, but it was a loss for the community.

As I posted recently, his date video (RIP) was really helpful when I was learning. Since it is no longer available, as someone commented, I thought I would post my notes from the video here, which is not far off from a transcript… …formatting isn’t perfect because I have better things to do.

The basic premise is there is a clock. Each number on the clock is either red (pull and escalate) or blue (push and lean back), and you go in sequence. If you have multiple dates, you are winding back the clock sometimes.

1 o’clock  blue

walk to venue 1

  • Let’s go,
  • ask how her day was,
  • tell how your day was,
  • sights on the street.
  • neutral.

2 oclock red

venue 1 well lit, coffee shop, pub, sports bar

spike in venue 1, flirty upon entry

  • o Can I trust you? 
  • o Good team player? 
  • o Good Future wife? 
  • o Give her a job. Find best seat. Best view. Send her off to find seats. 
  • o Text her as she walks off, nice ass.

3oclock blue 

about you and about her, giving rapport 

  • o where she lives, 
  • o where she is working right now, 
  • o what you do, 
  • o a little about who you are, 
  • o where she is from
  • o vibing making her feel comfortable, comfort rapport, not spiking
  • o no comfort quicksand

After about 30 minutes bounce to venue 2.

4 o’clock red

Bounce to Venue 2

  • o Let’s Go
  • o Where are we going
  • o We’re going to Paris
  • o We’re going to Vegas to lose all our money
  • o What are you doing? Just looking at your legs
  • o Close to next venue. Closeish to first venue.
  • o Sofa and couches, 90 degrees or next to each other. 
  • o Cool ambient music. Cocktails. Funky like a coffee shop.

5 o’clock  blue rapport – bigger topics, 

  • o hopes and dreams, 
  • o phobias, 
  • o what she is going to do in the future,  
  • o weird little thing about her, 
  • o what she wanted to be, 
  • o ends with a rooted base where you feel like you are on the same team

6 o’clock red spike – start to move to seduction bubble. Spiking physically

  • o talk fitness, 
  • o tattoos rings, 
  • o touch legs, 
  • o comment about her eyes, legs distracting you, 
  • o do you play a musical instrument, hand sizes,
  • o what is something I’d never guess about you? 
  • o suntans, 
  • o tattoos, 
  • o necklace, earrings, rings,
  • o hair, 
  • o toned body or what you like about her, 
  • o what do you like about me, 
  • o what you find attractive about her. 
  • o You smile a lot, is it possible for you to not smile for 10 seconds?
  • o As you count, you eye fuck. Gets to 3-4 and giggles. Slap wrist. No no no. Try again.
  • o The eye contact and touch creates an intimacy.

7o’clock Blue Chill, give some space, let her spike it up or ask about me, sexy silence.

  • Lean back,
  • Look away,
  • Go to the bathroom,
  • Let her start to invest, or spike it up or ask about me.
  • Leave the sexy silence.
  • Exit at a high point if possible

8 o’clock red

Kiss: matters that you go for it, show intent, and if get knocked back, no butthurt

  • o Vibe should have escalated, flirting and touching.
  • o Floppy test – push her away, bring her in, give her a shoulder rub.
  • o Playing little games
  • o Drive by kisses – Eskimo kisses,
  • o Whisper in her ear, getting really close to her and pulling away.
  • o I’m going to keep trying. I think you’re attractive.
  • o My job to try, your job to resist, I understand, going to keep trying. Going to go to the bathroom, will try again. 
  • o Not a long term provider boyfriend that is going to wait.
  • o You find her physically attractive and are not ashamed to say so.

9 o’clock blue

  • o courage and leading her to bounce home chill out 
  • o out of the bar venue, where are we going?
  • o have something back at your place to encourage her to come
  • o One more drink at mine, music, photos, films
  • o Finish bottle of wine back at mine,
  • o Open door to taxi, 
  • o Make sure to tell her where you are going, not a bar, not disneyland, seed pull
  • o Chill out – not keen or eager or twitchy or eager. Not a big deal

10 o’clock red spike at home

  • o Don’t stay and let vibe crash
  • o Can’t just stand in the kitchen or sit on the sofa and let the vibe crash to bog of comfort and rapport
  • o Shoes off, pour some drinks or make some tea
  • o Take her legs and spike across yours, bring her in. Watch a movie.
  • o Starting to give her a massage, start a kiss a little bit.
  • o On off on off. Push and pull. Calibration is red vs blue
  • o Letting her know back at yours that its on.
  • o If you’re lucky and it’s super on she jumps your bones. 
  • o Usually the girl is more nervous and doesn’t want to appear like she’s too easy. 

She’s going to say things like

  • o “I don’t normally do this”
  • o “Maybe I should go”
  • Good response: Cool, I understand, no worries
  • o take my laptop 
  • o take her by the hand, 
  • o let’s go in here, it’s more comfortable

11 o’clock – blue chill on bed

  • o back off once she’s in the bedroom
  • o often on the bed and she’s on the chair opposite
  • o or he’s leaning back and she’s on the corner of the bed
  • o big mistake would be to go 100 miles an hour like a horny teenager
  • o chill out watch a bit of the movie, drink some wine set the mood, look at some photos
  • o feel like there is a calm atmosphere, come and join me, take her hand and bring her over, or sit her on your lap, sit her next to me,
  • o then a little bit more kissing, on off on off, and reaching the magical 12 o’clock

12 o’clock – red sexy time

self explanatory

  • If she stops the clock at 11:00 or 11:30, set up a date, cooking, DVD, etc.
  • Rollback the clock for additional dates,
  • meet up, go for a walk,
  • following dates is drinks and back to yours.
  • Generally don’t want to wait for 3 dates.

Frame: Carrot vs. Stick and Active Disinterest

by Runner, posted in Dating, Street Approach, Theory

Frame: Carrot vs. Stick and Active Disinterest

Playing to win, instead of playing to not lose, those were some brave words.

It was braver still to act on them. It’s like the tide is going out on your ego and you’re going to see how good you are. I feel pretty naked. The tide is out. By playing to win, instead of playing to not lose, I am currently losing, or at least not winning. But what is daygame if not an exercise in delayed gratification. It would be demoralizing if I couldn’t figure out what to work on next. But I did, and you’re going to read about it.

Krauser talks about this frustration. He calls it out as “not actually doing daygame” but rather “having a nice chat with a stranger.” Yep, that’s what it feels like. Combined with some guys on Twitter telling me what my stats should be (they are likely right, but it’s hard to trust guys on twitter, especially the ones there for marketing purposes). I think this might be a reasonably accurate assessment of where I am in the process. I keep wishing I would figure these things out faster, but one of my favorite quotes from Mystery is that “patterns emerge over time.” Anyway, I have a slightly different conclusion than Krauser about how to break out of the “nice chat with a stranger phase,” and I’ll get to that later.

I’m good at approaching and I like talking to girls, ok, I’m good at having nice chats with girls. I’ve gotten many numbers and dates and even pulled a handful of girls (strongly available maybes and 1 definite yes girl). Many kisses, many near misses. I’m much more confident than I was 3-6-12-24 months ago. This was despite playing to not lose. Roy Walker described me as enthusiastic a few months ago and warned me of a phase most daygamers encounter when it becomes a grind. After the occasional setback, I often think “Ok, maybe I’m at that point now,” but it goes away after a few days and a few good sets.

My main problem right now is my frame. My frame leaks nice guy way too often. Nice guy has been leaking out of me all summer. In case you didn’t know girls in NYC really don’t like nice guys. This has been revealed by letting go of the ego game of playing to not lose and challenging myself to see what happens when I play to win (and I lost a lot more).

I’ve been building a boat to cross the river. An analogy that Nash uses often when we talk. Clearly a manly boat, I’m in shape, successful enough, tall enough, fit enough, leader of men, protector of others, check, check, check, but my frame is wrong. My boat looks pretty good but has an obvious leak and girls don’t want to get into a leaky boat.

Returning to reality from the analogy, here are some examples of what goes wrong:

In my approaches, sometimes my tease hits but then the rest of my conversation turns into an informational chat and becomes nice guy. Mr. V coined something like this “Your conversation with a girl will become as boring as you both can accidentally make it.” If the tease doesn’t hit, it’s usually a good indicator that she’s not in the mood to talk and it’s not going to go anywhere, but when the tease hits and it dies, it’s on me and my frame. I know I can’t get them all, but I can do better and I will.

Also, frequently in approaches and on dates, I give too much value, like something out of Japanese politeness culture or Mr. Rodgers neighborhood: “Oh you’re a singer, that’s cool and you must have a wonderful voice.” It works great for making friends and influencing people. It’s definitely a staple of my management style, and it makes me approachable and works great for leading teams and male and female employees. It just doesn’t work for attracting girls. This is part of the reason that many successful CEOs don’t do well in game. It’s too much carrot and not enough stick. My use of carrots is fine. I need to use more stick. It will probably make me a better leader too.

Instead I need to be more skeptical. It should be “You’re a singer? Oh God (credit Mr. V and hat tip to Mystery)! I hear autotune enables anyone to become a singer these days.” It’s subtle, but this preservation of my relative value in the interaction is probably the biggest missing ingredient of my frame. I just give it away. If I had it, I would unconsciously be more challenging and teasing. Referring to my analogy du jour, my frame just immediately leaks out of the hole in the bottom of my otherwise pretty cool boat.

If you see the girl as a glass that is half full, you’re not protecting the relative value frame and are in danger of slipping into nice guy. Accidentally, the girl is placed on a pedestal. If you see her as a glass that is half empty, the relative frame is skewed correctly, and it is more likely she will work to get you. Hypergamy is a thing. I would like to think I am actually relatively neutral on how I view each girl, part of that is I know I can just meet more, but I think I get skewed a little toward the glass half full perspective and lose my relative value frame because I am curious about them and not challenging enough. Curiosity is killing my pussy cat.

An example of losing the frame on dates: I get a girl out on a coffee date and the chat somehow slips into nice guy because I don’t go in with the correct relative value mindset, no challenge to her, just curiosity. That’s coming in at a disadvantage because of my mental frame. I have been counteracting this by trying to hit Magnum’s 5 points. I have had some success with this – a few dates where I got a girl to my apartment and lost her after kissing. The success so far has been in playing to not lose – I identified when a girl was repeatedly steering away from sexual topics and I decided to cut the date short. Helpful, but not enough. Need more challenge.

Another big thing that Mr.V pointed out to me about my dating conversation skills is getting into conversational quicksand (usually cultural quicksand where we end up talking about cultures too much) because I enjoy the topic. There are a few other topics like this that I have to avoid getting stuck on – I’m sure most guys have a few of these. The frame improvement for me is to say something about it, to show her a taste of my interests and personality and keep the seduction train moving through the station.

It is amused mastery, yet “I am the prize” that is spouted so often on Twitter just isn’t articulate enough. Neither is Lance Mason’s classic take on amused mastery: “everything she does is cute.” I am better than you needs to be subtly and constantly reiterated. Being a challenge. I’m skeptical so you need to work to impress me (which sounds like a mild form of dread game). The best she can do is that’s cute when she tries to fight and you enforce the frame until she submits and complies. Her reality is ridiculous no matter what – like most of us think of our bratty little sisters (if we have them). You reward her for submitting and complying and honoring you and your reality, but you have to maintain that relative value frame.

She needed less carrot and more stick too.

There is an escalation ladder of enforcing frame when a girl does behavior you don’t like (paraphrased from Krauser – source was his blog or one of his books, will update with the source later) followed by an explanation in carrot/stick terms:

  • 1) Ignore (no carrot, no stick)
  • 2) Joke about it (little stick)
  • 3) Call it out (bigger stick)
  • 4) Demote her/Next her (stick, no more carrots)

1 and 4 are passive strategies. They work if she’s attracted and is causing drama and notices you ignore it or step back and she will chase. That is if she is already attracted to you. I am actually pretty good at doing those naturally (withholding carrots), but they are passive and trying to attract a girl by ignoring her is generally a bad plan, and that goes double for NYC where there are so many shiny happy people holding hands.

Recalling the Mystery Method, active disinterest is where attraction is created, and that is essentially 2 and 3. You either tease her (preferable) or put her in her place or even frame crush (provide discipline her like her father should have). She’ll get a defensive tingle from that. This is the challenge aka the stick treatment.

Mystery’s classic example of active disinterest is “You’re French?” “I love French girls, I can’t even talk to you right now. *Back Turn*.”

I have not been consciously doing 2 & 3 and those are absolutely the weakest part of my game. Sometimes I would get lucky and it would work out and I think that’s how I got my dates and lays to this point. Getting lucky. That’s not really game. I should use more active disinterest to generate attraction, in approaches, on dates, all the time. Coupled with more tweaks to improve my overall relative value frame and remove conversational quicksand I expect to see more results. Good thing Mr. V is exceptionally good at teasing. You become an average of the 5 people you hang out with and I am getting better at teasing by hanging out with him.

In the last 6 months, I have definitely been escalating better. It puts a smile of validation on my face when a girl gives me the vibe of “Ooooh, how did we end up kissing like this, he knows how to escalate and I liiike it…” which gets verbalized as “…you move fast (said with a smile between kisses)…” When women describe being swept off their feet, this is what I imagine is happening.

Referring back again to Krauser’s post, he recommends a guy break out of the “friendly chat with strangers phase” by becoming more sexual in set. I agree, it helped when I actively did that a year ago. I regularly do spikes, stepping in, the little toe kick, laser eye contact, etc. But that is not my issue. This is part of the reason I am ending up in the situation with the girl where she is like “how did we end up kissing like this so quickly?” it was a friendly chat that turned sexual as I escalated and she complied and went along with it. She is a little surprised and often smiles as she gets swept off her feet. Hoever (I’m going to leave that typo there), even when it goes well, it is too much pull. Friendly chat + escalation is pull. That’s only half of the push-pull needed for seduction. She should start to feel like chasing me at that point. What is missing is the push, the active disinterest and making her work for it. If she is working for it, then she is not surprised by the escalation, and is a more active participant in the escalation and it proceeds much smoother.

Perhaps Krauser has a more naturally strong frame and so it doesn’t necessarily occur to him as a frequent issue. Or maybe I’ve just been developing in some unusual organic way. I’ve absorbed most of his teachings and gotten some results, but my diagnosis is that my frame (specifically holding my relative value frame and maintaining it by active disinterest) is my sticking point.

I’ve been losing some the past few weeks. It’s OK. One of the good things about solo sports, like… say… running… is that you are competing against yourself and you can train with and against others to motivate yourself to improve. Daygame is also a solo sport, and having a good friend in Nash, and a good wing in Mr. V (and Magnum and LongBurnDaFire) helps me sort through things quicker and bounce back from the daygame lowpoints when we are struggling with our sticking points.

Finally, this Twitter and Blog thing has been helpful for meeting new people. I spotted a guy on the street about a month ago who approached a girl I was about to approach. He did well and got her number. Then about 2 weeks ago, he approached Mr. V after Mr. V approached a girl he was about to go after. He was like “I read some Krauser, and I follow some guys on Twitter, Nash and Runner… …that put a smile on my face.” We’ve been out a few times since then, he has a really good vibe: enthusiastic and reminds me of myself a year ago. I don’t want to out him, but I know he’s reading. Those kind of encounters are the reward of having this blog.

Playing to Win Versus Playing to Not Lose

by Runner, posted in Dating, Theory

Playing to Win Versus Playing to Not Lose

Several dates and conversations led me to a big epiphany this week about playing to win instead of playing to not lose.

Approaching to win: I realized that a lot of my approaches have gone down a cultural interview path, or a friendly chat. Any leads from those go nowhere. I have been regularly guilty of playing to not lose: not teasing enough (not wanting to lose by having her possibly get offended), not making an attempt at holding them there longer (“ok, bye” instead of “hold on” that MrVDaygame uses), and not shutting up on occasion and letting them invest (and trying too hard to carry the conversation and keep it going when they just aren’t hooking). To stop doing this and open with the intention of winning, I have to go in with a stronger tease (which could fail) and be more polarizing with more spikes and “hold on, stay put” frame (which can be rejected), and giving them an opportunity to invest (which they may not). Higher quality sets will yield higher quality leads.

Texting to win: you could lose a girl to being overeager, and you could lose a girl to being too cool. Trying to time it just right and playing to not lose can trap you either way. I think I have been playing it too cool and too overeager at just the wrong times. My current model (which I am now testing) is to keep the energy going with a light tease text (nice to meet you Ms. Orange Soda) or something, and then try and keep the energy going, not falling into the trap (as Nash called it) of waiting too long and being too cool (a symptom of playing to not lose by overcompensating for not wanting to come across too eager/ thirsty). Girls in New York City are bombarded with men and activities and all sorts of distractions so you have to harvest their attention while you have it (trying to keep their attention would qualify as playing not to lose). So as long as they are compliant, I am now trying to respond rather quickly and with some light banter, and try and seed a date and get them out (as one should). 

Anywhere along that line they can break things and cease being compliant and that is where an active push is the right move. An example of the push is when you attempt to invite her out for a drink (and this happened to me yesterday) and she says “can’t I have yoga at 715” and doesn’t offer an alternative time. I made fun of her lightly by “yoga yoga yoga yoga” and she responded with “I know, I know” and was more compliant after that. Still didn’t end up getting her out for other reasons, but I know she’s a dead lead and I played it to win. It felt good to know.

There are also girls that just want to be text buddies and never come out. By playing not to lose, she wins a friend. Yes, I am speculating that female friendships with each other are about as strong/valuable as a text buddy relationship (not very) and because you are afraid to lose, you end up losing your limited and valuable time on this earth.

Dating to win: Nash talks about trying to kiss a girl every date. Magnum talks about not kissing a girl on a short first date so that things escalate further and faster on the second date. Different methods, I’ve tried them both. Both work. What’s important is they have a plan, and they’re both dating to win. 

Regarding dates: I had a date with a 2-set from Europe with MrVDaygame a week or so ago, and each thread of the conversation that he started had some point and often it was sexual. My conversational threads were all over the place and while some of my threads were teasing and sexual, there were enough neutral or repetitive threads that made it more of a fun cultural chat, as opposed to a sexual man-to-woman date conversation. I kept checking (and re-checking) certain conversational boxes over and over because I enjoyed talking about them, not because it was moving the seduction forward; this is not game, in fact it is anti-game. It is a trap I was falling into for a looooooong time, easily since I was a teenager. It’s humbling to be able to abstract my former attempt at “game” as “Oh you like _____ too! Let’s talk about _____. Of course she’ll like me if we both like to talk about _____ and I tease her a bit and escalate” and while it did work on occasion if she really liked me, if she was on the fence the anti-game would repel her because it is a subtle form of playing not to lose. And the worst part is, I thought I had game. Ugh. Instead, the way to go is acknowledging and appreciating a mutual interest and then cutting the thread and moving the seduction train forward: “I like that you like _____, it makes me feel like we have a connection. What’s that funny look you’re giving me, you nerd? *playful push*”

Regarding series of dates: Particularly Russian speakers and New York career girls on the wrong side of 28 like to have rules in place for how many dates it takes to seduce them. I like to move fast enough to get their attention and show off some confidence (I like it when they are kissing me with a big smile and telling me “You move pretty fast” though I fuck this up occasionally by trying to move too fast and coming across as too eager not going 2 steps forward and 1 step back). Occasionally, when I move that fast, and we have comfort, then little compliance and frame tests come up. Come visit me in Brooklyn! (before we’ve had a sexy time). Enough of these, and you realize it just isn’t going to happen for whatever reason. Her programming is to not get pregnant with the wrong guy, and I am running into all sorts of fences to the possibility of the sexy situation where she could possibly get pregnant. By putting up with that, I am playing to not lose. To her it looks like I am so invested in the idea of getting with her that I will put up with whatever bullshit she wants to throw at me; as a result we are less likely to get together and stay together if we do get together. Ultimately it’s a waste of time and energy.

Many romantic stories are told by grandparents (“He just kept pursuing me! I finally had to say yes!”), but I suspect that those stories are omitting that some small amount of progress or compliance was being demonstrated each time, or it’s just Grandma reminiscing about what it felt like to be pursued.

What is the advantage of playing to win?

My hypothesis is that playing to not lose is less likely have winning outcomes. Your energy is focused on winning and winning only. Sounds a lot like the idea of top guy that Nash and Yohami keep bandying about: top guy has so much abundance he can only see the girls saying yes and doesn’t even notice any girl saying no. I’m not top guy, but I occasionally get a taste when a girl tornado gets going (where I have more leads than I can manage) and only the girls that step forward make it through because they are all I can see. When I’m not in a girl tornado, I can emulate top guy behavior by playing to win.

There’s a classic wall street book “Hedge Fund Market Wizards” about successful Hedge Fund managers by Jack Schwager, and in his interview with Ed Seykota, he asked “What are the elements of good trading?” Ed’s response “The elements of good trading are: 1) cutting losses, 2) cutting losses, and 3) cutting losses. If you can follow these three rules, you may have a chance.” There’s an old trader saying that is at least 150 years old: “let your winners run and cut your losses short.” As Nash has said, if he’s making progress with a girl, letting it take a few more dates to seduce her is very OK. He’s letting a winning girl run. A calibrated play to win.

By having a lot of volume and approaching often, it can set you up to play to win and emulate top guy behavior, as you are forced to cut girls quickly when they disappear or don’t comply or otherwise misbehave, and just the winners remain in the running (until they misbehave). You cut your losses by avoiding chasing her (and rewarding her bad behavior) or attempting to negotiate desire and get her to come around, which frequently ends up being a waste of effort and energy. You can then focus your energy on the winners or looking for more winners.

I have also found it to be emotionally relieving to identify the girls who are going to not comply or behave badly, make one attempt at a corrective action, and then let them go if it doesn’t work. I gave them a shot, played to win, didn’t work, move on and don’t think about it further. This is also the mindset of elite athletes, if they miss a shot, they shake it off, and focus their energy on the next one, that unhindered psychological focus is a big part of their training and development that enables them to perform at an elite level.

Play to win.

2 years on… …is daygame worth it?

by Runner, posted in Dating, Street Approach, Theory

2 years on… …is daygame worth it?

Yes, but not for the reasons you might expect.

Many people have expectations and fantasies even about what daygamers do. Most daygamers, even the advanced ones think they should be doing better than they are.

Originally, I was going to start Daygame in 2013. Nash, who was one of my friends and nightgame wings at the time was like “Oh Shiiiiit! Runner’s serious. He’s going to get good at daygame and leave me in the dust, I better get started…” …and he did. Meanwhile, after ordering Krauser’s books, I got a girlfriend (from okcupid), and was then poached out of that relationship by another girl (from my social circle), and then I broke it off with her and moved to New York and tried Tinder for a few years. It stopped working for me in 2017, I don’t exactly know what changed, but I decided to drop Tinder (I didn’t officially delete it until May 2018, and I closed a few girls off it while starting daygame).

So I started and committed to daygame on August 6th, 2017. I forced myself to go out regularly. Now, 2 years later, I’ve done 2371 approaches as of August 5th 2019, and closed 4 girls. 600 the first year, 1800 the second year. Most of my improvement came in the second year, I just wasn’t approaching enough in my first year.

Here’s some raw data:

The Raw Numbers

I currently have a 10% chance of getting a lead (e.g. a number) from an interaction. 90% of my leads are phone numbers and a few are instagram or facebook. I got one email once from a ballerina who never responded.

Visual representation of how much you should approach.

Note the slope became consistent with more approaches, 5/day on average is what it takes.

First instadate was at 100 approaches, first date + makeout at 250 approaches, first close at 370 approaches, second close at 540 approaches, third at 1110, fourth at 1820. Based on those numbers my expected yield would be somewhere around 1/450 close to open. If those are my stats, I’m overdue for a new +1 anytime now, but I have 2 strong prospects, one of whom is getting back from a 2 week vacation tomorrow (she’s been in touch regularly while on vacation) so I’m pretty optimistic that my stats are consistent.

I was hoping that my yield would be higher, but I am starting to accept that it will get higher over time.

Could I have had a higher yield?

Yes. I don’t need to pad my numbers to sell anything. My sole motivation for doing this is my own satisfaction and achieving my own goals. There are a few girls who wanted it (they were strong maybe or yes girls) and I turned them down because something was off, I didn’t want the risk of dealing with them – sticking your dick in crazy is a little more dangerous in America – litigation and social media #metoo nonsense have caused some girls to miss out on sexy times with me.

I also have had a number of near misses, where I escalated too fast or too slow or made obvious mistakes on the date. These were the tuition of learning calibration. I thought they were sure things, and maybe I fucked it up, or something else derailed the train.

I had to unlearn many bad habits that were taught to me by a previous life in nightgame and the Tinder experience. I do occasionally go on a night out, but it is less than once a month, and lately Mr. V and I have started trying out some areas of Manhattan on Friday or Saturday between 10 PM and 1AM for this thing called gutter game. It’s fun, it’s like we found a new candy store. I should have been doing this earlier, but better late than never.

Daygame in New York is hard. New York city has so many people from so many parts of the world (many of them are even the infamous shithole countries) that it has become a low trust society. Girls assume you are trying to sell them something or worse and will often just have a frame of “I don’t talk to guys on the street.” By being fit and dressing well (meaning stylish, not expensive) and smiling and having a lower voice and a good vibe, you can get them to stop, but that still guarantees nothing…

My yield might also be lower because I approach models and actresses that are running around the city. I feel entitled to it because I have gotten enough numbers and dates with some of them. I have not closed any of the girls of this caliber, but I have come close. It got easier when I stopped caring and pedestalizing them and realized that they are just like other girls. When I approach these types of girls the response is usually very polarized – it’s a low yield but high reward.

Finally, at the risk of sharing what may be a limiting belief or a weasel: One other reason I have considered for my yield being lower is that I have a more introverted personality type, and I’m an intuitive. That’s what’s known as a nerd for those of you who don’t know much about personality types. I can have a good connection with any other personality type, but some are more likely to connect with me than others. I consider psychological chemistry to be similarly important to physical chemistry, and my personality type is rarer and I connect deeper when I do connect, but less frequently. If I had a different personality type, I would either 1) be terrible at daygame or 2) be more successful by a made up estimated factor of 2-5 based on self reported results from twitter guys and have more lays to my daygame career. Maybe that’s bullshit, I’m going to do another year of daygame and I’ll let you know what I think next year.

What have I gained?

In a word: growth.

I’m seasoned now (though I still consider myself an intermediate daygamer). Some days I need a quick warmup to get the social muscles going, other days I just start out hot. Approach anxiety still happens, as does approach apathy, but they are not obstacles or anything that would be considered a problem. I’m more likely to approach girls in my daily life – luck is opportunity meeting preparation, and I am prepared to meet girls when the opportunity presents itself.

In approaching, I do fine alone, it’s more fun with wings and I think I can go longer and it is helpful to have someone spotting IOIs, but it is occasionally a competitive situation between Mr. V and I. I try to let him have the redheads (we call them Wendy’s after the restaurant), unless he’s in another interaction, then I have to approach.

I am internally validated. I’m sure there are some people that are following me on twitter and definitely a few of my friends that know I do daygame who are like “you really talk to 450 girls just to make the sex with one of them?” or recently “that seems like a poor use of time. I can get 4 dates a week on tinder or hinge.” Sure. Good for you. Cool story bro. When Tinder or Hinge or whatever dries up – what will you do then my man?

Internal validation is soooooo gooooood for my vibe. I am happy with the girls I am meeting, and I am enjoying talking to girls, and I am improving and becoming a better man. I feel like a reasonably well-adjusted man most of the time, and some girls have even commented on it. No one can manage my vibe for me, and it’s fully my responsibility to develop and maintain.

I pedestalize girls much less than before. Nash used to say that any time I mentioned I got a number from a model, he knew it was going to be a bad time for me, I had already pedestalized her. Now I don’t seem to care as much and I am mainly looking for signs she is into me.

The biggest improvement I have had to make to my “game” is teasing. Teasing is so fundamental to attraction, and part of the reason my yield was so low to start is that I was too serious and didn’t tease well or enough. I have a feeling Roy Walker and Thomas Crowne probably sensed that about me when they met me (serious and enthusiastic). Mr. V is very good at teasing, and by hanging out with him, I have absorbed much more and easily gotten 100% better in my approaches since I started hanging out with him. It also just makes it more fun. Fun is good for one’s vibe. Teasing is also creative and feels like poetry to me. Many of the great seducers of history were also poets (need a reference to back up this assertion), and I am starting to see the connection. Still working on this.

I can now handle the extreme weather. The extreme NYC summer temperatures of 107F (41C) (it’s been 85-95F (30-35C) for most of July 2019) and winter temperatures of -20 are not a complete impediment, but I have strategies for dealing with them (fashion choices, going indoors, etc.).

I’m better at texting. I write shorter texts with more commanding and leading, my pings are more fun, and I have realized that even if you don’t text perfectly, if she likes you, it doesn’t matter. I have become a daygame stoic, shedding the mystical worship of the daygame gods and the belief in a magic text that will make her like me enough to actually come out on a date. I still wish there was a magic text, but I’ve cured that expectation so I’m more outcome independent and that pays dividends in my day to day vibe. Still constantly improving. Mr. V and I will also sometimes review texts as we are more impartial, and that editing really helps hone what should be sent as a text message and what is better said in person. We do come up with some really funny stuff sometimes that does not end up getting sent. Still working on this.

I’m better at dating. I spend a lot less money (some second dates would cost me $40-$60-$90 and then I would get ghosted), and now I try and kiss girls relatively quickly to determine if they are into me or not. I am wasting a lot less time chasing girls that are “just not that into me” and also filtering out the foxy illegal economic migrants from Eastern Europe who move here looking for an under the table waitressing or nanny job and English lessons (and maybe they are looking for a guy, but somehow I don’t end up being their type or perhaps I’m lost in the r-K-selection wilderness). Still working on this.

On dates where I know she likes me, I can be bolder and more playful and thus be even more attractive and really have a great experience together. It’s rewarding and very seductive to feel powerful on a date. I feel that way much more often now. My logistics are more efficient, so things move faster. Still working on this (noticing the pattern here?).

Conclusion

I’m pleased with my progress so far, and I’m going to stick with it. This next year I aim to get better at approaching in shops and other retail establishments like this guy. I hope my yield goes up, I anticipate that it will, but even if it doesn’t that’s OK. You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find you get what you need. I’m going to keep going. Daygame Stoicism.