Trolls often ask “isn’t pickup just a numbers game”? I say trolls, because it’s rare you’ll hear this question from an honest person sincerely seeking answers. The question is farcical once you dig into it a bit, and anti-gamers like to use it in an attempt to discredit game/evolutionary biology/sex differences/female hypergamy…. pick any one or all. (Funnily enough, you’ll hardly ever hear women using it, probably because women don’t like to think of themselves as numbers.)
The “numbers game” fallacy is similar to the “hours game” fallacy. Think of a great musician. He has to put in a lot of hours of practice to get great at his craft. Once greatness is achieved, a person asserting an “hours game” argument would contend that the musician’s continued greatness depends on all the hours he puts into playing. But that is not the case. A great musician, once trained, can play five minutes a week and still be great compared to the non-musician or hobbyist musician.
So it is with game and pickup. Logically and unavoidably, most neophytes will make more approaches in order to put their game theory to practice in the field. That is how you get good. Simply reading about game and approaching one woman per year won’t cut it. But once a number of up-front approaches have been made — once the steepest part of the learning curve has been crested — and the aspiring seducer has improved his game acumen, then he can reduce his number of approaches while still enjoying a very good sex and love life because his odds of any one approach resulting in a fuck close have measurably increased over his previous, game-less baseline.
And from personal experience, this is exactly what happened to me. When I first tried game, I kept my approach numbers at the same level i had before game. Once I started tasting improved success using game, I increased my approach number because 1. I was excited to see how much I could accomplish using game, and 2. I had to approach more women to try out all the new things I was learning.
Naturally, my close rate increased with my increased approach rate, owing mostly to my game skills but also partly to the larger pool of women I was hitting on. (In contrast, had I increased my pool of prospects while using NO GAME, my close rate would not have increased by nearly as much.) Then, after a few years of this fucking around for fun and sexual profit, I decided that I was interested in longer term relations with women, so I gradually pared back my number of approaches to about the same level I had before learning game. And a funny thing happened. I was having more success with the fewer, and hotter!, women I was approaching than I would have had without game. I had a skillset called game and it increased my positive interactions with women across the board. In other words, my RATE of rejection was lower, and my rate of success higher.
That’s the way doubters need to view the numbers game fallacy: numbers matter, but game matters more. The two work in concert until enough competency is achieved that numbers are no longer needed.
For those who refuse to part ways with the numbers game fallacy, I direct your attention to the headstrong but socially clueless geeky beta male. I think most of us have encountered this type of guy in our lives. He’s aggressively nerdy, unafraid to approach women in his awkward fashion, and never learns from his mistakes. He has no discernible game besides fearlessness and a lack of shame. He’s a little “off”. He’s our test case for measuring game against numbers. He’s got the numbers, but he has no game, and the results aren’t pretty: one ugly rejection after another. But he soldiers on.
You can approach thousands of women, but if you have no game, if you persist in engaging women with your socially clumsy schtick and never trying to improve yourself, all that you’ll get is a huge notch count of rejections — a botch count. Sure, you might “get lucky” once in a blue moon using nothing but numbers game. But why wait for that when real game — real cultivated charisma — can increase your lay odds to a level, at the least, where you go from 1 lay in 1,000 approaches to 1 lay in 100 approaches? And with hotter babes on top of it? That’s an order of magnitude better success with women over just maxing out your number of pickup attempts.
Not to mention, a numbers game mentality will do nothing for you once you’re already in a relationship with a woman you love. Having no game at that stage is risking a lot; a lot more than a measly five minute approach in a bar. And it’s not like you can numbers game your girlfriend over and over until she falls back in love with you.
Anyhow, I hope this clears the air on this fallacy. I doubt it will convince the trolls, but then they were never really open to being convinced.
Meh. Just get a 5 and be happy that she swallows and doesnt complain.
Why not just hang yourself?
i ve banged a forty year old once . my dick went soft during sex and i ve to make an effort to do it again. its really disgusting . seriously try some hot hookers .and then you will realize what you should do .
Of course you need to improve your odds through practice. I always encourage my students to keep vigorous notes after a night out to internalize and remember the mindsets, lines, and tactics that worked, or didn’t. Learning game takes years of practice. There’s a lot that goes into something that is really so simple.
“Not to mention, a numbers game mentality will do nothing for you once you’re already in a relationship with a woman you love. Having no game at that stage is risking a lot; a lot more than a measly five minute approach in a bar. And it’s not like you can numbers game your girlfriend over and over until she falls back in love with you.”
I agree with this notion, your game needs to be stronger than ever especially when you have a girlfriend in order to keep her interest up ; but now; question to you all alpha there is : how do you go by Up-ing your game when you have a girlfriend – might seem like basic question but im a complete novice – a Beta of the Betas Pretend i’m a high school kid as well (Cause i am)
Try dating a psychologist if you want to see what it takes to keep her in line before and after the hook is set. They’ve a perception of the world formed by the views of crazy people.
You’re preaching to the converted.
Trouble is, everyone knows betas whose lives would be changed by learning some Game, but steadfastly refuse to accept its principles.
I told a friend of mine, a paper Alpha with Omega level luck with the ladies about this site. He rang two dames later, in a tizzy over the “sexism” and “exploitative, sociopathic teachings” of the Chateau. This man has been stranded on Friendship Lagoon by several women, and complains about how girls go for jerks, but takes no remedial action.
What is needed is a novel, or a movie, based on the teachings of this site. It’s the only way to reach the typical beta male.
The guy has drunk the female kool-aid.
Sorry, but until he accepts that men and women are equal,
and women should own their bad choices in men (otherwise it’s called rape, amirite?)
he is never going to learn anything.
I recommend a visit to divorce court for him.
Mexican Pete wrote: “What is needed is a novel, or a movie, based on the teachings of this site. It’s the only way to reach the typical beta male.”
I think the material is already in its best form. In my opinion, a novel or movie would ruin it. There’s already enough articles here for an entire book. To publish one, probably all that would be necessary would be to organize the existing articles into sections and write a foreward and afterward or something. Afterall, that’s what Carrie Bradshaw did
[heartiste: i have to agree with mexican pete here. distilled truth is great for the tiny cadre of internet investigators with naturally deductive minds. but to reach the masses you have to push their emotional buttons, and nothing does that quite as well as movies or quasi-fictional novels.]
WWHR (What would Howard Roark) do?
GeishaKate wrote:
A fictionalized portrayal would be ubergay, unless done really well, and there simply isn’t enough producer talent to transition it to another medium. I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell is a cautionary tale here. Heartiste might cash in on the infamy, perhaps, but it won’t be artistic, and hence, it won’t be lasting or instructive or classic.
If Bradshaw made it big by organizing essays into a coherent whole, then that’s obviously the way to go. From there her work was optioned into a fictionalized translation by top-rate producers.
Heartiste wrote:
Not evolving out of the blog format is severely limiting. You have already said essentially everything you needed to say. Now you are applying the same principles to different topical issues, like some kind of TV news magazine. Interesting as far as it goes, but not essential (or lively) in the way the earliest postings were.
Those of us who are quick learners pick up the basics and move on. We do not require repetition. As I understand it, you take this writing enterprise as a hobby and nothing more. If that is the case, perhaps you find it recreational/cathartic to rehearse the same fundamentals rather than expanding them purposefully. The repetitiveness will eventually alienate even the most loyal readers. A collected works primer with a unified focus would separate basic training from advanced application. And it would help alter the national conversation by demonstrating your credibility as something other than an internet hobbyist. “I just read your post on such and such. You may be onto something!” “I am. Go read my book.”
Right now, initiates must dive into a vertiginous machete-hack through your unorganized thicket of archives, which were written piecemeal and with an evolving focus. The natural “investigators” are confronted with a hodgepodge that does not highlight your best work or your main point. That may be satisfactory for you, but you should know you are missing a unique opportunity to truly blow up (in the good sense).
This is a great example of what happens to talent apart from agency. Forget asking what some matronly Russian Jewess’ fictional-idealized man (Howard Roark) would do. Find your Ari Emanuel (Ari Gold) or Scott Boras or Leigh Steinberg or Drew Rosenhaus, and ask them how to get from Point A to Point B. You don’t need an idol to imitate. You need representation.
The heavy lifting has already been done. It just needs organizing, promotion, and protection (including the protection of anonymity by agency). What do you get out of it? Besides the money, of course, and besides the convenience, and besides the early influence on the cultural battleground of the next half century?
You get focus. You streamline your message in a way that only the strictures of publishing can force you to do. Right now you have too many ideas floating independently out there, half-thoughts and jargon, threads teased out and abandoned. A single publication, like a book, filters the wheat from the chaff and organizes your innovative thinking into an efficient vehicle. It’s not even about convincing the world so much as disciplining your rhetoric into an even deadlier wit than it already is. Right now you needle and prod, hit and run, when you should be a cold-blooded, well-known, and highly feared assassin. Are you a master of the “Dark Arts” or what?
Matt
Candace Bushnell wrote her column, turned it into a book, it became a t.v. show and later a movie. I never read the book, but I did read another of hers, Lipstick Jungle, which was briefly on television, and made it part of the way through another one, Trading Up.
Matt is right. The ideas you discuss, which you explain better than almost anyone else, are rapidly going mainstream and many people are exploiting them commercially as well as personally. But you lack a means to share in the wealth or even go along for the ride, because you have only this poorly organized blog and nobody knows who you are. A book would be the natural extension of your blogging and could be produced at the cost of a few months’ effort. The raw material is all here. Think of what could be. I have only been reading this blog seriously for a few months and already I notice the repetitiveness that Matt alludes to. Organize, edit, tighten up the content, market it effectively, and you will do yourself and the people who discover your work much more good than if you remain here on the blogging plateau.
The number game has worked well for me two decades ago. No game. Nervous as hell I’d approach ESL new arrivals and sooner or later 2 of 6 I’d them wound up in my bed. Those were the days.they were feminine and and not yet tainted by NY bulldike Culture yet!
It’s all about deliberate practice: http://calnewport.com/blog/2010/01/06/the-grandmaster-in-the-corner-office-what-the-study-of-chess-experts-teaches-us-about-building-a-remarkable-life/
Highly skilled musicians must, in fact, practice often and practice hard.
“If I don’t practice for a day, I know it. If I don’t practice for two days, my wife knows it. If I don’t practice for three days, the world knows it.”
Spoken by one of the great pianists of the 20th century, Vladimir Horowitz.
[heartiste: wrong comparison. the right comparison is between a rarely practicing expert musician and a non-musician. the former will always clean the clock of the latter.]
Any recommendations about how to learn charisma without interacting with girls? Almost all my interactions at the moment are somewhat awkward, so i am in a negative feedback cycle where i don’t approach much because my past experiences have not been good, so i don’t have many chances to improve my charisma. Things which i have thought to do are starting a blog with the hope that with the topics i wrote i have more conversational material or also doing some improv, singing or dancing classes, any ideas?
I’m guessing you should try chatroulette, game there. You’ll never see those girls again, but make not of the body language etc.
Learn to be indifferent. Easier when you’re opening for the “Not Conventionally Attractive”. e.g. girls you’d really not like to go further with.
Hey, women say they want a practiced guy, whom other women want.
Since women control whether relationships happen, guys gotta be the heartbreakers …
Just practice on uggos, slowly work your way up.
[…] Heartiste had an article on this where he points out that you don’t need to work the numbers game, after you have honed your skill, and this is correct, however, you still need to actively game. Some men may be able to disappear from game all together after a few years and then come back to it again like it’s a bicycle and start riding right away, or picking up a guitar and plucking like you’ve never stepped away from it – but you still need to game, you still do need the practice, at least some men do. It is true that you never really lose game, as a natural I can attest to that, but I can also attest to the fact that if you completely lose focus of it for an extended period of time, you will seem to lose it, and you will need to ‘relearn’ all your old lessons. It’s still in there, you will still have charm and charisma, but if you forget the keys to game, you will need to rediscover them. It’s actually happened to me, like my current writing problem, it was a desire to try the beta way, and a lack of desire to keep banging chick after chick. Can you lose game? I think you can lose anything, it’s focus and desire that you lose, not game, but finding passion where there is a void of it, can be a daunting task, and legends were written about hero’s who struggled with such a thing. Share this:EmailFacebookDiggRedditTwitterStumbleUponLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]
Success is built by results, not hours invested. Granted, getting it right will take a while (and that’s where all the time investment goes). But simply doing stupid shit for the requiste X-number of hours is only going to get you nowhere.
Also by the kind of person you are trying to succeed with.
Much harder to break the ice with someone who doesn’t want to talk to you.
Bounce, but not before a parting shot: Did you come here to be silent? You can do that at home and it’s cheaper too
This goes to both Martial Arts and pro Golfers learn: PERFECT practice makes perfect. There was a story recently about a pro golfer who changed his approach after the birth of his daughter, no longer trying to “hit balls endlessly” to “practice away” his mistakes, rather have short, intensely focused on proper technique actions. Less time on the driving range, a lot more on addressing each ball properly and identically, to create accurate consistency. For martial arts, the same way. You want to burn in muscle memory the correct not bad technique.
In fact you could argue that if you game your long term girlfriend or whatever, you are still constantly practicing. With just more intense focus on doing things right.
“Freedom is the disciplining of desires so as to make the achievement of the greatest good first possible and then effortless.” — Robert Barron
Athletes and musicians point the way, as Barron explains through the end of that clip. There is no mastery without apprenticeship, no high-achievement without practice, no proficiency without restriction, no liberty without law, and no freedom without discipline. Game is no different.
The world’s most “natural” baseball player is inferior to minor-leaguers who have interiorized the discipline, as Michael Jordan’s experiment in AAA demonstrated. You don’t quite need Malcolm Gladwell’s 10,000 hours, but there are no short-cuts to Carnegie Hall.
The “seduction industry” is sorely lacking in acknowledging this hard limit of life. But then, their job is to sell seminars and videos. Promoting a secret to effortless success is an easier sell to the flabby minded than is a serious training regimen. Know the tricks of the trade, sure, but don’t underestimate the difficulty of execution. The promises of diet pills are more tempting to the techno-faithful American mind-set than is the admonition, “Step away from the cheesecake, lardass.”
It may seem like an obvious point to make when we are discussing it out of context, but in context we have a tendency to blame everything but ourselves. An entire concept of liberty has been developed around this No Pain, All Gain fantasy. “Follow your bliss” and all will be well. Indulge your desires and blame your genes for becoming a pissed-out drunk. Whore yourself out and chalk it up to hypergamy. Chase ass to the exclusion of all other goods and age bitterly, paranoid, detached, and alone. Libertinism regards as slavery the discipline necessary for liberty, even as libertines are unconsciously captive to their own addictions and cravings. Hedonism devours itself.
“Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty.” — Frank Herbert
Matt
one of the best posts I’ve ever seen here.
It’s only a “numbers” game, if you have no clue as to what you are doing… It’s like fishing, to a certain extent – yes there is a “luck” component, mostly regarding if there are any attractive women in the area you are in – after that, it’s skill to get her interested, and set the hook. Then reel her in…
So sure, you could say basketball is luck for sinking a basket, or throwing a football, or pretty much anything else if you set that task to someone who is unskilled – but to someone trained, it’s certainly NOT luck. It’s skill.
It is as simple as that…
If it’s just a numbers game you should be able to score with chicks by doing random shit like jump up and down, or take a dump in front of them. If it’s random, then doing anything enough times will cause success. The fact that you have to, you know, be charming in order to score proves its not a numbers game.
Trolls? Are we using this word correctly?
[heartiste: yes.]
Internet trolls are people who post inflammatory messages and then wait to see everyone fight. They get their jollies from starting flamewars. The word you’re looking for is ‘doubters’ or ‘skeptics’.
[trolls are insincere commenters. they like to bomb comment threads with their hobbyhorses — such as “numbers game” anti-gamers — regardless of the evidence to the contrary, in hopes of scoring a hit on the proprietors and assuaging their own bruised egos. you can identify them by their IP regions, their giveaway sentence structure and their juvenile form of argumentation.]
I don’t know that I would necessarily characterize “numbers game” as a fallacy. I don’t believe Game and Numbers Game to be mutually exclusive strategies.
I think of it like shooting percentage. Let’s say my baseline — i.e. before I learned any game — shooting percentage was 15%. And then I learned game and my shooting percentage rose up all the way 35%. I still want to take as many shots as possible. In fact, I probably want to take more shots than I did before.
This is no different from basketball. A guy gets drafted and he isn’t a very good shooter his first season in the league. And so he practices hard over the offseason and raises his shooting percentage up from 30% to 40%. Do you think the coach is going to be asking that guy to take more shots or fewer shots?
I realize this analogy is limited by the simple fact that a man can only date so many girls at one time. But let’s say we’re talking about a really ugly guy who is just very socially inept. His shooting percentage is like 1%. He learns game, and this helps him out a great deal…maybe it takes him up to 15%, but it isn’t likely to go much higher. That guy is going to need to take a lot of shots. It’s still a numbers game for him. It’s a little bit more forgiving a numbers game, but a numbers game it remains.
So — 1 in 100 is considered “good” ? ‘Cause I’m thinking – with anything less than ~1 in 10.. I’d rather just take things into my own hands..
[heartiste: for the typical beta glued to his joystick, 1 in 100 would be an improvement.]
The man who isn’t bleeding from romantic failures has at least saved his money. That at least is a step up from trying and failing without understanding.
Never allow the competition for a woman, to result in putting your assets on the line.
you mean, “practice makes perfect”?
Who knew?
I mostly agree with this post, in particular that this is not necessarily a numbers game. However, this is a poor analogy:
Once greatness is achieved, a person asserting an “hours game” argument would contend that the musician’s continued greatness depends on all the hours he puts into playing. But that is not the case. A great musician, once trained, can play five minutes a week and still be great compared to the non-musician or hobbyist musician.
Great musicians practice ALL. THE. TIME.
[heartiste: jesus fucking buddha, reading comprehension people! i’m not saying great musicians don’t practice all the time. i’m saying a great musician could SUBSTANTIALLY LIMIT his practice time and, due to his accumulated years of expertise, still be a better musician than a non-musician or a hobbyist musician. THAT is the relevant comparison.]
Slash gave an interview once where he said he always takes a guitar with him anywhere he travels, because he’s afraid that if he doesn’t play for a single day, he’ll forget how. Great athletes are just the same.
Yes, a pro-level musician or athlete who’s out of practice will be better than a rank amateur, but so what? The point is to compete at the highest level, and isn’t that what “alpha” means? Musical and athletic talent are both physical skills and they require reinforcement on a physical level. Game is basically mental. You still need practice but I doubt the skills fade as quickly as physical skills fade.
It comes in waves, often when one woman becomes interested in a group dynamic, others do. I have been not so discreetly fucking a 24 year oid, and a few of the other women in my group picked up on it and I can tell they’re jealous. I’m 41 btw, so it is all down to game.
True. On a related note, if a woman on the better side of the attractiveness bell curve is really into you, even if she isn’t quite your type, take her downtown. Other women will see her showering you with her affections and the effect on them will be much better than showing up regularly without any girlfriend. Or, for that matter, being like those tools who show up with a “girlfriend” who isn’t into them and is busy checking out other guys like me.
Preselection is king. Other than preselection, be into interesting things, things that make money, or things that require skill and dedication.
You’ll do much better with women when you are around those that need those skills to get ahead in their work or education.
Use makes “loose”
Doing it right now, and i am noticing the improval, every each time. Course, my game is still not shining, but i got a reaction from a lots of the girls. if not outright, than later at second contact. My problem though is my unsecurity about the social circle i’m in, since these people tend to gossip a lot, and offer no support, often just looking how to undermine you, and so uncertainty, (if i’m feeling that way deep inside) is really underminig my game. So i got it, that if you are uncertain about something in your life, sort that out first(if it’s not too complicated), so you can regain selfconfidence. Chicks sense that. No matter how i try, how confident i look at the moment, they just feel that deep inside i’ve been insecure at something. But once selfconfidence returns bad magic dissapears…
Great blog, keep up the good work. Though i’m a bit courious about your religion (nominal protestant?)
Sorry for bad english, cheers
Answer is along the line of change venues.
The history that you have with these backstabbers will always be at the back of their mind.
Try getting a new bunch of friends.
CLEO (yes, girl magazines, the masters of passive aggressive behaviour) recommends:
1. reduce contact
2. reduce time you spend with them through excuses, then
3. you’re always too busy to see them.
And the finale
4. when they catch on and ask you for an explanation … never call or speak to them again. How dare they try to sabotage your efforts to protect their feelings?!?
Remember the bell curve. At one end is women who you don’t really even need game with, you’re their ideal type and you just don’t have to fuck it up. From what I’ve seen, this is where naturals and players function. They have high notch counts because they are good at screening for these types of women. How large this percentage of women is for them at that end of the bell-curve can vary and I suspect being good looking and having Dark Triad traits helps a ton.
On the other end of the spectrum some women no matter how good looking or how tight your game, they’re just not going to be into you. As the Science of Sex Appeal shows, a woman’s sense of smell and pick up on biological markers and can turn her off if there’s not enough genetic deviation between the two of you. Things such is this may be at play at this end of the bell-curve.
Where Game matters most is to all those women in the middle that can be swayed one way or the other. However, as to the context of this posting, a numbers game can be ran if you want to cycle through women quickly to find a Marissa Tomei to your George Costanza. Granted this could be as simple as pulling a Quagmire and running around asking women if they want to have sex and eventually getting a yes, a la the Apocalypse Opener.
In my opinion a numbers game is great if you want one night stands and want a fast track to sex, but if you want to have actual relationships then having tight game is where it’s at because just running the numbers won’t cut it long-term.
I should also note a numbers game is only great if you have a fairly large amount of women in that end of the spectrum that naturals and players operate at. If you can’t even get 1 in 100 to say yes then you’re going to have to improve yourself, including learning Game. Thems the breaks.
Or the pool keeps getting refreshed.
Which is why areas with hotels, colleges, bars, libraries, museums, auction houses are the places to be.
MECE mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive concepts, number’ s game and the inculcated mental schema of game. exponential growth followed by a happy steady state..
Einstein always insisted that he wasn’t smarter than anyone else, he (rather modestly) said that his gift was to beaver away at problems for a lot longer than most.
Of course, he was smart enough to know where to apply his talents.
The facts are that some people are more charismatic than others, some are more competitive than others, some are more artistic than others. Game for one person means emphasizing your particular talents selectively and intelligently.
For example, not everyone is a great speaker. Sure, we may all think we sound brilliant but, really, honestly, some people are better in front of mics than the rest of us. Ever see a really good photographer at work? The crappiest point and shoot suddenly becomes an incredible tool in their hands the same way the pencil and paper are these incredible things for someone who can draw.
Hours helps, if by hours you mean “learn from experience.” If, after 10,000 hours of practice, your technique hasn’t advanced, that’s a polite way of saying “You’re an idiot incapable of learning. Go buy a Fleshlight.”
Or change the audience you are around: your presentation may be wrongly interpreted or where you are, others are better at it.
Sometimes the place has been saturated by others with skill so a new guy arriving at that level is unable to see results.
This post is simple, but I like it because often times, the simplest things are the hardest to see. This (simple things concept) is especially true for the stupid, the haters, and white knighters (some redundancy obviously built in here).
On a related note, is anyone else less than shocked at the salon article where the woman admits throwing herself unashamedly at her favorite male pornstar?
I’m guessing the massive pre-selection she saw online is what did it for her. Kinda like having women all over you in multiple albums of facebook pictures for new women that friend you to see, except you’re having sex with them. Interesting concept. The least shocking component is that a beta male settled for what was undoubtedly pussy with wayyyyyyy too many miles on it. Once again, thanks to the Chateau for making sure all of us are walking around with our eyes wide the fuck open.
1 percent inspiration, 99 percent persperation
That’s not the way to go into a club though
But sure a good way to end before heading home with some success.
I anticipate a future where I can just respond to every topic with a Tyler video lol
That last line was great: I’d be like I am with you guys now but, if you were a girl, I’d be in your space (up on you).
you’re halfway there buddy! but yeah, the interesting thing to me is how much TD has evolved from utter creep to social mastery. the more recent vids are interesting in terms of seeing how far boundaries can be pushed. its one thing to give field reports, quite another to see them as they happen.
Ya his personality, especially when he first hit the scene, was massively fucked up and value-taking. But even in his asshole days he was still totally brilliant at breaking down and explaining human psychology and social dynamics.
His archives are available around the net (fastseduction.com should have them) for anyone interested in reading his entire early posting history. He was pretty cut-throat with calling keyboard jockeys and excuse-makers out on their bullshit and blindspots and was pushing limits and experimenting with new theories all the time (handling AMOGs, boyfriend destroyers, etc). If you’re really technical minded his old archives are a good read even though pickup tech has evolved since those days.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?150383-For-Teallaura-Loving-enemies&p=3390120#post3390120
Sad.
Its all about that initial pain period where you do a ton of approaches to improve your skill set.
That period is the worst since all you do is get rejected, but if you soldier through you get rewarded at the end.
George Leonard’s book “Mastery” is a must read for newbies. You don’t see steady progress. What you see is plateaus followed by quick spurts of growth. Your success rate increases each time you break past a plateaus.
CH cooling off for weekend
As you said yourself, half of game is just being where the women are. And if you want quality women, ones who are decently pretty, intelligent, and not batshit crazy – and you live in big US cities – you’re out of luck since they are in such low quantity. The numbers game works in the opposite direction, so to speak: since they are so rare and so high in demand, even the tightest of game won’t cut it these days.
It’s easy to master the active half of game where a man’s behavior counts. The real problem – and question – is what is a __reasonable__ solution to the other half, as we see our beloved country crumble and people diminishing in quality over time.
“The number game has worked well for me two decades ago. No game. Nervous as hell I’d approach ESL new arrivals and sooner or later 2 of 6 I’d them wound up in my bed. Those were the days.they were feminine and and not yet tainted by NY bulldike Culture yet!”
Agreed.
This is one point on which I slightly disagree with Heartiste.
Assuming one is not a clueless Omega, (ie Urkel), and has a modicum of social savvy, self-awareness and desire, then simply having contact with women and a willingness to say “hi” is about all it takes.
I’ve kind of harped on this before, but I’ll say it again, the #1 predictor of success in any man when it comes to pickup, the top indicator of a man’s ability to meet and attract women is nothing more than the number of women he meets on a daily/weekly basis.
Every man is going to be attractive to a given number of women. Based upon his looks/status/charm/style/game he is theoretically going to be desireable from anywhere from 0% to 100% of women (his A% number). An A-list movie actor will be in A80% range while a good-looking guy with solid income and game will be in the A50% range. Beta schlubs and omegas will fall in the A5%-A10% range.
However, the other part of that equation is the number of women each man comes into contact with. The best angler in the world is not going to catch any fish casting his lure into the fountain at the Bellagio in Las Vegas. While a 5 year old with a fisher price rod and reel will catch buckets of fish in a well-stocked pond. Does that mean the tyke is a better fisherman?
Because a fat, balding college professor with A5% comes into contact with hundreds of 18-24 year old women per day and ends up dating a few new ones per month mean he is more Alpha than a good looking businessman who works 7am-6pm, spending 99% of his day with the same 10 employees and rarely has a chance to get out much to meet women?
Numbers do matter. Why else have gameless high school kids for generations hooked up for no other reason than they are surrounded 8 hours per day by 400-500 young, single, available, guy-seeking hormonal girls? Eventually, the social order is sorted out, people meet each other, make friends, go to parties and mix socially and sexually. Would a decent to good looking kid being home schooled have as much contact (success) with girls as an Average Joe public high school kid?
And with numbers come comfort and calibration. It does no good to fire a bullet and simply be told you missed the target. You need to know by how much and to what direction so that you may process this info and try again with better success.
With numbers come failure, change of tactics and trying again. Of course, an omega is immune to this. He’s socially retarted and does not learn from error as he feels no shame.
But we should not discuss outliers, instead focus on the 90% of men. And for them, yes, numbers do matter. It is vital to have contact with lots and lots of women in order to hone one’s game.
A man whose job allows for such contact is at a serious advantage over one whose job isolates him from women. Even meeting a “nice” girl at work can lead to party/happy hour invites with introduction to her hot sister or roommate. Friends have friends and the process unfolds exponentially.
Even the concept of learning game on the internet is a numbers issue. For centuries men sought to understand and decode women. Naturals were good with women but didn’t know why. To even know a natural was rare and the betas could only stand in awe and wonderment.
The internet came along and allowed for aggregation and analysis of information using millions of men’s individuals experiences as datapoints. This is all “numbers”. The aggregate sum of millions of male-female interactions. A single man would take 100 lifetimes to have such experience. But the internet allowed for it to be distilled and talked about, along with the ability to identify and reverse engineer the Way of the Natural.
So yes, numbers do matter. Pickup is a function of your A% x The Number of Women You Meet Per Week. Because time is often limited for working men, the “meeting women” part of life has to come either during work or after work. If you work in a target poor environment, this leaves from about 7pm-10pm per night to meet women in nightgame which is arguably one of the most hostile environments there is.
There is a reason why so many people meet (1) At Work (2) At School (3) Through Friends From Work and School.
This is where the numbers are. This is where even schmoes are meeting women every day. It’s not hard. Throw game and an attractive lifestyle into the mix and it’s downright easy. Hide out during the day in a cubicle working with overweight married women and go home to the couch and a man will struggle.
So, yes, numbers do matter. Contact with Women during the day and week is the essence and core of success. It allows for building your social circle, sharpening your game, getting invites to events, crashing, burning and learning and establishing a confident/abundance mentality.
Omegas need not apply. But for men with even a hint of game, numbers do matter.
I had some sort of deja vuh reading this post, have you posted it before?
“Every man is going to be attractive to a given number of women… An A-list movie actor will be in A80% range while a good-looking guy with solid income and game will be in the A50% range. Beta schlubs and omegas will fall in the A5%-A10% range.”
Agree with your post, but your numbers are a little off. I’d say a celeb would be attractive to 95% of women.
No way would an omega be attractive to 10% of women. That would mean the lowest of men would have a chance of fucking 1 out of 10 women. Too high. An omega would be attractive to 0.0000001% of women.
Don’t forget that “beta” is also relative. Lots of good looking guys are beta.
Anon, I totally agree with your revised numbers. Much more accurate. And yes, I have seen and known many good looking men who are betas. They are seemingly unaware of their potential in attracting women.
[heartiste: they seem unaware because THEY HAVE NO GAME. a no-game having handsome man will be beat by a game-having average man almost every time.]
I’m a personal trainer in San Diego and see/meet people all the time. I am good friends with a girl used to date. (We decided we are much better just as friends as our relationship becamse too turbulent for various reasons) She gives me incredible insight into women as she is very rational yet feminine.
She told me how good-looking she thought one of the trainers was. This guy acted cool, aloof and his non-verbal mannerisms were alpha.
Eventually he and I became friends but immediately I was aware of, when verbal mannerisms are taken into account, how beta he was. He could be a model, he’s a nice guy but doesn’t have the alphaness to him that his non-verbal self portrays. My friend agreed after she’d spent time around him.
A few examples in my mind really demonstrate the fact that pickup is in large degree a numbers game.
1) Consider a beta-ish guy who’s about an A2%-A5%. He looks like Steve Buscemi but is outgoing. Overly talkative and leaves no mystery or aloofness. A borderline omega yet has self-awareness and slowly, over time, through shame and pain he does learn to correct his behavior.
Throughout his day he gets very little positive attention from women. He is essentially invisible. Dresses plain, acts beta, blends in and is non-threatening to women.
However, at night, from 7pm-1am this guy is a bartender. Just set aside the fact that this makes him “situationally alpha” within the club. Forget that for a moment and consider that he is still his talkative, dorky self behind the bar.
Because he works in a popular club, this brings him into contact 500 with women per night. Due to his A2%, that means every night, 10 women find him attractive enough to give their phone number. He goes home with a new woman every night and slowly builds a soft harem of women.
To an outsider, even to a decent to good looking engineer who works in a cubicle with men all day, this bartender guy’s a “player” and “the women love him”. When in reality, no, he’s an A2% lower beta who just so happens to interact with thousands of women per week.
Sure, he’s gonna get better over time. Just as with any other skill.
But Michael Jordan had the NBA scoring record not because he was the best of all-time, but because he took the most shot attempts as well.
So, numbers do play a huge part in pickup.
2) Screech from Saved by the Bell was an Omega Max. A cluess uberdork.
Yet because tens of millions of girls watched this show every week, does anyone doubt that Screech (aka Dustin Diamond) didn’t receive his fair share of loveletters and private pictures?
An A.000001% x 10,000,000 girls = lots of pickup success.
The Numbers Game.
3) The fact that this very blog had an entire post dedicated to Alpha of the Month James Hooker, indicates that pickup is a numbers game.
[no it doesn’t. hooker scored a young cutie because of a combination of game and his higher (relative to his quarry) social status. a janitor at a school has plenty of contact with hundreds of women, yet you don’t see the typical janitor pulling off what hooker did.]
Solid. Which is why the hardest men for women to keep loyal or interested, are bartenders, male teachers at female colleges, lifeguards, doctors, lawyers and policemen/soldiers.
Of course the guys in the remaining professions, if they can put it in their heads that women see them as “security” and not “attractive” can be just as difficult.
It’s all about the awareness: guys too “easy” to snag, make women take them for granted.
Would a man being settled for feel comfortable? I’m guessing not.
Would a man getting sloppy seconds feel okay? I’m guessing not.
I realize my last post was a rambling, unfocused mess in the point I was trying to make. Heartiste’s ability to succintly make a hardhitting point with minimal words is truly an art.
BTW, nice mention in the Aussie paper. That’s how it begins. A well-read blog whose chatterings get picked up by a mainstream paper. Radio and TV spots follow and slowly the masses are awakened. I see good things in your future.
I’ve referred several guys to your site, but often get the sense they’ll “read it when they get the chance”, but never really get around to it. Their loss. Their loss indeed.
Keep up the great work you’re doing.
My congrats as well. I’ve actually referred both guys and girls here or sent them articles that are applicable. Even if somebody doesn’t read it or agree with it, its spread the word in some sense and when/if they are ever open to the message, they might remember it.
Ever since I combined my own, non-PUA style with the numbers game I’ve been a lot more comfortable in set than when I focused on applying game. I don’t approach willy-nilly, mind, but I don’t invest too much thought on things like strategy or lines. What I do is approach women who I find interesting, vibe with them a few minutes and if it’s on, I go ahead from there. Likewise, if the girl is not interested, because she has a boyfriend or simply doesn’t like me physically, then I move on.
I must say that not giving a shit whether women like me is pretty liberating. Without feeling the need to impress my game is a lot more fluid and loose than when i was micromanaging my interactions.
That’s what I try to explain to my PUA buddies. That’s the difference between a natural and somebody who is a beta by heart is his mental state during the interaction with the chick.
PUA constantly talk about getting in the zone and just having a night where they ‘click’ to get the chick, where all it is really… is not giving a fuck. Women feed off your vibe.
I don’t do lines, critique my approach, or any of that nonsense. I just screen and if they seem friendly, I go chat with them. I feel people make things more complicated then it needs to be.
People tend to forget that even the biggest nerd can improve his game by just approaching many women. Yeah, he will most likely not get laid at first; but eventually he will become immune to rejection, project confidence on approach/during the conversation, and start closing the deal in his own way.
That’s how I did it when I was young and eventually became what PUAs called a ‘natural’. Also, hitting the weights and learning how to dress appropriately helped…
I do pretty much the same thing. When ever I roll up to a girl the first thing I notice is if she wants me around. If she is attentive and flirting back, then I know it’s on. From there things pretty much take care of themselves. The only thing I have to do is vibe, go in for the kiss when I think it’s right and ask if she wants to go to my place or hers. I’ve found that focusing on milestones instead of keeping track to smaller details works a hell of a lot better for me.
Here’s how I see it.
No game, no approach < No game, Lots approached < Some game, some approached < Good game, selective approach
Game raises success rate but approaching and just saying “Hi” always beats reading book upon book on game.
Discovered this show…which apparently is broadcast on the “Comedy Network”.
This is a good examination of game and dispells the “numnbers” fallacy.
This show forces two “Pua”s to compete against each other in different categories including “reverse gold-digger”—where in 3 minutes the guys have to get the girls they’re gaming to buy them a drink…and “freestyle” game where they have to “close”.
Note that they have a time limit and if you watch the show, this is’t approaching dozens of women.
It’s about using the game techniques in a time limit to achieve the goals of the challenge: get a number, get girl to buy you a drink, deal with a cock block etc etc.
Check out the Cajun episode to watch a top PUA instructor running game. His cousin he goes against is a newbie. Neither has a looks advantage over the other but the difference between the reactions the two guys get are pretty blatant.
Oh and Cajun is a super huge jacked up bodybuilding 6’4″ clearly rich guy so obviously the only reason he does well is because of that stuff right? There’s an ep with two better looking instructors from the same company but they have worse game and both do pretty shitty. Cajun does a lot of really subtle things right in his body language, voice tone, eye contact, etc that the other guys don’t have down.
Another good ep is the Cobra Commander one, the guy is a good demo of having absolutely no outcome dependence.
Also give the Meatus ep a go. It’s a good contrast of a good looking Nice Guy vs a total and complete sleazy asshole.
Keys is a great show. They have a lot of jacked up “seemingly alpha” guys on there who, when you actually see them in action, are often pretty awful or totally incongruent to how badass they were pretending to be in their profiles.
caveat: KttVIP was almost always filmed in one club. rumor has it there were times ppl called their friends over to run game on. also, #s mean nothing in P^. im sure a bunch of those #s were fakes/flakes.
but every once in awhile there would be awesome EGs of advanced game (cajun being the best EG). but those instances were relatively few and far between.
This video deals with the post’s point and talks about “Conditioning”…
This is about how to be a “narcissist”…each show deals with some game techniques….
Lovely post.
Simply put. Game is a NUMBERS GAME (variables outside of your game) VS YOUR GAME (variables within your control).
The higher your game, which includes many facets, the greater the percentage yielded.
I did a post on this here : http://justinwayneblog.com/2011/10/19/is-game-purely-a-numbers-game-she-either-like-you-or-she-doesnt/
Comment o the Sydney Herald piece.
“Name-calling hardly seems a fair response to the sad plight of these marginal single men, locked out of the incentive system that keeps other men’s noses to the grindstone.”
You think its unfair that we aren’t subjected to the grindstone? That there is some redeemable incentive to marrying one woman?
Game is the new incentive. It means more than one woman.
Besides, even if you somehow get men’s noses to the grindstone, you honestly expect men to happily endorse, subsidize, and legitimize all those past fem- cock carousel missions?
Heartise says start with the poor female decisions.
Penis in Venus tax for every penetration pre-commitment.
Party slut tax for all the hard work it took making it past the bouncer.
Virgin happy hour- intact hymens drink free.
Single mom job opportunities- pick crops by hand to earn all the child support you can handle.
13 inch tax- yes, you won the genetic lotto. Yes you still have to pay us a tax for using that thing.
Anonymous, your ideas are gold. Snappy one-liners for carousel-riders and golddiggers.
“Now, I do not imply that the lady’s only ambition is the procurement of currency, however, she shan’t be seen with any impecunious gentlemen.”
Is it fair to be tied to one woman of uncertain virtue and questionable morals when the laws are in favour of a man likely to lose half his assets, and be forced to “keep her in the style she is accustomed” along with the very real attendant risks of contracting an STD, being denied access to children or having children with conditions directly traceable to her intimate habits, or paying for her future health costs while separated or divorced from said woman?
Comments on the Secret Service Colombia prostitution scandal, please…
In the article where the Chateau proprietor was quoted, I was amused that they conveniently avoid discussing female hypergamy as part of the problem. They got close with some of the salary/relationship percentage numbers, but just wouldn’t connect the dots.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/men-stuck-in-a-wheel-of-misfortune-20120414-1×055.html
Mainstream tripe is never going to blatantly cite female hypergamy as the reason for our culture decaying into a shit storm. In a way, you’ve got to respect what people like Charles Murray or Doc Love do. Despite their advice being overly feminized, it WOULD make a positive change. Arguing “men stopped working because women are getting fat” versus “women are getting fat because men have stopped working” is just getting trapped in chicken or the egg logic.
Ideally, if men started making more money and then migrated away to countries with women who still act like women, I imagine at least some of the feminist behemoths I know would take the hint. No matter how deeply ingrained a girl is within feminine ideology, when she meets a cock that can dominate her cunt, she suddenly starts to lose weight to “be healthy,” and gets back some of her feminine allure because she “wants to feel younger.” If you have only a few of these women getting dumped for hotter girls, expect feminist backlash. But if men rapidly pumped and dumped every worthless cobwebbed pussy they saw, put a stop to beta-supplication, and made it a point to treat equal-rights-banter with proper amused mastery, we would see progress.
In a generation like ours, women only see a few old and haggardly feminist authors who declare themselves “self-empowered.” It doesn’t hit them. They have their boyfriends with white-knight complexes to reassure them. But If they were to see legions upon legions of single, old, resentful, ugly-as-fuck feminists at Walgreens buying nicotine patches, at pet shops buying cat food, and at Spencer’s buying vibrators for their flappy pussies; I promise, it would put at end to this embarrassing charade.
@Holden:
You must mean this piece that does connect the dots
“The American Shengnu” (=Leftover Woman in Mandarin)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304692804577281581288138216.html
man i love u dawg. peace.
Heartiste and YaReally,
I want to thank both of you alot for the tools that led to this bang, and also would like advice on how to proceed.
Last week we went out with part of our group from a weekly social activity. Besides me there were 2 guys (both gay) and 6 girls. I was being aloof, playful and flirty, and passing shit tests like they came from my silly little sister.
I ended up at a club alone with the hottest girl from the group (22yo) who’d just ended a 3 year long relationship with a guy who had turned into a boring couch patato. We talked, teased, flirted, danced, I did alot of push-pull and over the course of the night I moved in for the kiss like five times, but every single time she averted her head.
There was lots of kino, ass grabbing and two times right after averting her head she grabbed my waist closer. Not sure what was going on here. I just remained unreactive and acted like nothing happened/it was no big deal. 4th time she said apologetically “I’m not gonna kiss you because then things will become awkard”, I looked at her with a straight face, saying nothing. Her: you don’t mind, do you? I smirked and replied: You know I take life as it comes. Curious about the best play here.
Sometime later she turned to me and said “let’s go”. We went ouside to our bikes, I assumed it was all lost and over and we were indeed riding home. I felt disappointed and thought that I couldn’t do anything now because it was kinda cold outside which in my mind killed the vibe. How to handle this spot? Make some “desperation move” or accept temporary defeat and act like it’s no big deal (I’d see her again in the future)?
Anyway, I did nothing and then it was she who suggested we go smoke a joint somewhere. I knew a bar that was still open and where they usually sell all kinds of stuff, so we went there but only smoked cigarettes and had more beers.
I brought the conversation back to matters of sex, teased her about her boring sex-life, and we said things like
her: I just wanted him to grab me sometimes, to push against the wall and not accept my flimsy protests
me: that’s what all girls want inside, and most guys are too scared to do
She’d previously asked about my experience with girls and relationships, I lied that I had one 9-month long relationship that I ended when she insisted on meeting each others parents (upon which she laughed, and told her about celebrating christmas with her bf’s parents, at which we both laughed with contempt) and for the rest limited myself to lots of short-time flings.
She started inquiring again, and I was just completely acting like I was YaReally (been reading lots of his posts lately, both here and over at rollo’s blog (do you post anywhere else?)), how I mostly slept with girls who were in relationships already, so as to lower the risk of forming attachments, just giving them the sex they really want without trying to sabotage their relationships, etc. She fully bought into it and was intrigued.
I told her some (mostly made up) sex stories, such as how I once had sex in the restroom at university with a girl who was about to give a presentation to a small class with me in the audience. How she told me afterwards that giving the presentation with me in the audience and feeling my semen slowly drip down her legs was the horniest thing she ever experienced.
her: wow! I want to go try things like that! (we each had 10+ beers at this point, over the course of >7 hours)
She said how she had been with only 2 guys, excluding the one who she had just given a blowjob, because that didn’t count (lol), and that she had for the rest only kissed alot of other guys during her relationship. She started to inquire about how many girls I had been with.
I was evasive
she started to guess…
“like, ten?”
I laughed
“tell me!”
“I… don’t really know”
“approximately?”
“eeh…” pondering “…”confused, thinking look”
“tell me!”
“… about a hundred?” (divide by 25 for the real number)
her jaw dropped, her pupils dilated.
“geez, that’s alot”
She appeared to believe me completely, mainly, I think, because I had been congruent with it the whole night, and other girls at the beginning had been teasing me about my supposedly frequent cheating which I had very tangently hinted at. Shortly afterwards she pulled out her cellphone and asked for my number.
me: heya, I’m not that easy!
she: no, I’m not trying to pick you up… I just want to know your number because you’re interesting and I feel like I want to hang out with you when you’re doing something cool…
me: well, ok… just for this one time then…
number, first name, last name (“let’s keep it to just my first name” “oh, yeah, sure, hihi”)
I then explored her pants with my hand (with probably half the bar watching, lol), she was really wet and did not resist at all.
I asked her what was her deepest sex fantasy.
Her: ehm… I think something in a forest… being fucked hard against a tree. Geez, I’m really horny right now.
Me: let’s go to xxx park then.
I stood up and moved her towards me.
Her: But, honestly, I’m just not attracted to you…
Me: I know you are.
Her: You’re just projecting your own horniness onto me.
Me: I am, and you love it.
Then she instantly forced her tongue into my mouth with such glee as I have never experienced. I pushed her away shortly afterwards, she forced her way back in, and I allowed her a slightly longer stay.
Her: but the park is so far.
Me: no prob, we’ll just fuck right here in the toilet. *start pulling her forcefully towards the restroom*
Her: no, haha, no, let’s go to the park, ok?
Me: sure
And so we did. We had pretty rough sex, I spanked her naked ass hard, she said that it hurt but also moaned and begged me to keep going. “You really are a dirty slut inside, aren’t you”. “Yes, moan, hihi, yes I am”. She sucked, swallowed and licked my dick clean.
Then we rode home, she teased me by calling me a pervert, I responded playfully with “slut”. She stroked my hair, I stroked hers, then pulled it and told her that the moment I saw her lips I knew was going to insert my dick between them (was this a mistake? should I have bonded instead?). I described the environment in a somewhat poetic manner, she laughed and said that deep down I’m a romantic. “I have to turn to the right here…” “Ok, you have my number or else till next week” (bad?)
I’m ecstatic that this happened at all, but also would like to fuck her again, further exploring her fantasies. My main question is: how to proceed? She has my number, I don’t have hers, she hasn’t contacted me so far (this happened 3 nights ago). I fear that she woke up feeling like a giant slut and ashamed of herself. I likely see her again near the end of the week (group of 10-12, 2 hour long course in the evening, willing to provide more info in private). If she shows up, how should I act towards her? How do I go about arranging possible follow-ups? If she looks really shy/ashamed, how do I react? If she doesn’t show up, should I ask the teacher for her number? And then what?
My main question is: how to proceed? She has my number, I don’t have hers, she hasn’t contacted me so far (this happened 3 nights ago). I fear that she woke up feeling like a giant slut and ashamed of herself. I likely see her again near the end of the week (group of 10-12, 2 hour long course in the evening, willing to provide more info in private). If she shows up, how should I act towards her? How do I go about arranging possible follow-ups? If she looks really shy/ashamed, how do I react? If she doesn’t show up, should I ask the teacher for her number? And then what?
Looks like you did great. Just wait for her to come back. Don’t arrange things with her. If she’s into you, she’ll find reasons to arrange meetings with you. She knows you don’t have her number. And if she shows up, act exactly the same way you did in the club.
Let’s talk about all these many ugly ass Lesbos. I mean come on! They’re getting younger and younger. To quote John Lennon, ALL WE ARE SAAAAYING,IS TO GIVE COCK A CHANCE!