Post: #26

Ross operates on the premise that attraction is a process, not a feeling. There are things that activate the process and deactivate the process.

A cheerleading uniform activates my attraction process. It has since I was six years old.

If a girl wants to deactivate attraction, it's easy. All she has to do is light up a cigarette.

Post: #27

(07-30-2014 01:30 AM)puckerman Wrote:  Ross operates on the premise that attraction is a process, not a feeling. There are things that activate the process and deactivate the process.

A cheerleading uniform activates my attraction process. It has since I was six years old.

If a girl wants to deactivate attraction, it's easy. All she has to do is light up a cigarette.

David D'Angelo went the other way.

Attraction is not a choice.

I never really understood that. Doesn't make sense from a player's POV.

But it's one of the more dominant unspoken mindsets in the community.

A limiting mindset if you ask me, but no one asked me.

Update - Did some reading, I get his point.

WIA

Post: #28

(07-30-2014 01:36 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  David D'Angelo went the other way.

Attraction is not a choice.

Did you read my post? I said that "attraction is a process."

Did I say that attraction is a choice? No.

Did I say that attraction is not a choice? No.

I said that "attraction is a process."

Post: #29

(07-30-2014 02:21 AM)puckerman Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 01:36 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  David D'Angelo went the other way.

Attraction is not a choice.

Did you read my post? I said that "attraction is a process."

Did I say that attraction is a choice? No.

Did I say that attraction is not a choice? No.

I said that "attraction is a process."

Why are you going after WIA? I read both posts, he was bring up David D's quote as a counterpoint, but said he didn't understand why David D would say that. David D and RJ are not necessarily in opposition on this.

I read "attraction is not a choice" as being that it's not a conscious process.

Post: #30

I remember casually reading his stuff years ago and theres a sentence he used on a girl (like a whole paragraph). Tried it on a couple of girls (one online) and it worked like magic. It turned the relationship to supersexual just like that.

Im a very rational and skeptical guy and hes definitely on to something.

Then I started meeting girls easy so I ost motivation to delve deeper into his stuff, which I regret now after reading the thread.

And yes I agree that a lot of those PUA guys who might be successful are young and semi goodlooking. I never looked at any and said "those guys could make a George coztanza successful with ladies". But I think ross Jeffries could.

But I just skimmed through one ebook and tried one sentence, so take that for what its worth.

Post: #31

(07-30-2014 08:23 AM)RockHard Wrote:  Why are you going after WIA? I read both posts, he was bring up David D's quote as a counterpoint, but said he didn't understand why David D would say that. David D and RJ are not necessarily in opposition on this.

I read "attraction is not a choice" as being that it's not a conscious process.

Yes, you did read both posts.

Attraction is often a process which occurs in the subconscious mind. It can occur in the conscious mind, but it happens more often in the subconscious mind.

Sometimes, it's a choice. Most often, it's not a choice. It's something like: "I love this guy, but I really don't know why."

Post: #32

What are some links to reading material to begin looking into him more?

Post: #33

Am I the only one who gets creeped out by his whole look and vibe?

I don't mind a him talking about archaeology but dating advice? I just can't.....

Post: #34

His lack of physical presence gives more credibility IMO...

Post: #35

(07-30-2014 04:07 PM)bacan Wrote:  What are some links to reading material to begin looking into him more?

Look at The Game. This is his site: http://www.seduction.com/

Also, you can take a look at this: http://www.datingskillsreview.com/ross-jeffries/

Post: #36

(07-30-2014 06:06 PM)Sebastian Wrote:  Am I the only one who gets creeped out by his whole look and vibe?

I don't mind a him talking about archaeology but dating advice? I just can't.....

So you'd only trust the advice of a guy who's good looking and dresses sharp?

(07-30-2014 06:29 PM)Rubio93 Wrote:  His lack of physical presence gives more credibility IMO...

Exactly. It's not looks, style, status, money, right? So what's left is pure game.

Some links: http://www.pickupguide.com/layguide/deli...s_rule.htm

http://www.pickupguide.com/layguide/ has a whole library of patterns.

I'd really recommend audio and video over reading. I'm no expert but it looks to me like delivery is critical. Go back and look at the video with the blonde but look at her friend's reaction; RJ starts talking to her and her friend starts to smile and settles into her seat. She sees that something's going to go down and she's entranced even though he's not even acknowledging her presence.

I was watching a video of RJ with Wendi Friesen, another hypnotist. What I noticed about Friesen is that she makes these overt sexual puns. I had a friend in college who was a horrible punster but it worked. That old "that's what she said", or always finding the double entendre in whatever a girl said. Girls would eat that up. That's like NLP lite. You're making a joke but it gets her thinking about sex.

Post: #37

One thing that Jeffries taught was using props and gimmicks to break the ice. I can recommend two that he was teaching at the time that I would use regularly and were highly effective with women.

The first is "The Cube". I found a website for it.

http://www.mensxp.com/dating/seduction-s...-game.html

The second is handwriting analysis. I actually took a course in it, so I developed a good rap. Women would go crazy over this. I once went in a nightclub and I was surrounded by women wanting their handwriting analyzed. A man came along trying to block me and demanded to have his handwriting analyzed, so I told all the women his handwriting indicated a highly dishonest person.

This is the only thing I could find. But it doesn't look very useful.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/28133014/Ross-...g-Analysis

Both gimmicks operate off the principle that women love to hear about themselves.

Post: #38

Book by Bart Baggett, who makes the graph-o-deck product (prop) that RJ supposedly liked, you can read it all online from what I can tell

http://books.google.com/books/about/Hand...N-wBf8pIUC

The thing is, it's like astrology, you can just make shit up. Skim the book for some ideas but what you want to do is highlight some fun qualities and then maybe tease a bit... Maybe suggest that she's impulsive or a bit vain. You just need enough framework to have talking points like "oh, you cross your t more to the right your're impulsive".

Post: #39

You know I have an ex-gf who used to do the handwriting analysis trick to seduce girls for threesomes....

Post: #40

Cube??? I haven't heard that in years! (because I stopped going to pua forums) oh they also have strawberry fields?

Anyways, I don't think those tactics can make her interested in you all of sudden. you can only use it if she is interested in getting to know you as part of an entertainment.
If you have plenty of things to talk about, you don't need those.

It's like knowing how to surf. you can use that to build stronger attraction. If there is no attraction, 'hey I know how to surf' who cares??

(07-30-2014 08:51 PM)Sherman Wrote:  One thing that Jeffries taught was using props and gimmicks to break the ice. I can recommend two that he was teaching at the time that I would use regularly and were highly effective with women.

The first is "The Cube". I found a website for it.

http://www.mensxp.com/dating/seduction-s...-game.html

The second is handwriting analysis. I actually took a course in it, so I developed a good rap. Women would go crazy over this. I once went in a nightclub and I was surrounded by women wanting their handwriting analyzed. A man came along trying to block me and demanded to have his handwriting analyzed, so I told all the women his handwriting indicated a highly dishonest person.

This is the only thing I could find. But it doesn't look very useful.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/28133014/Ross-...g-Analysis

Both gimmicks operate off the principle that women love to hear about themselves.

Post: #41

(07-30-2014 10:49 PM)RockHard Wrote:  Book by Bart Baggett, who makes the graph-o-deck product (prop) that RJ supposedly liked, you can read it all online from what I can tell

http://books.google.com/books/about/Hand...N-wBf8pIUC

The thing is, it's like astrology, you can just make shit up. Skim the book for some ideas but what you want to do is highlight some fun qualities and then maybe tease a bit... Maybe suggest that she's impulsive or a bit vain. You just need enough framework to have talking points like "oh, you cross your t more to the right your're impulsive".

I used Bart Baggett's system. Women would always say it was accurate. He is a Forensic Handwriting Expert. You promote it as a scientific system. Handwriting reveals clues about the unconscious mind. I took his professional course, but with the graph-o-deck of graphology cards you can get started analyzing right away without knowing much and you make up the rest. His website may have it or Amazon. Or you can use another system. But the goal is just to use the analysis as a way of getting into her mind and talking about herself and from there you can spin off to other topics. One advantage is that she ends up telling you everything about herself in the first 10 minutes so you know what you are getting into.

Post: #42

(07-31-2014 12:47 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 10:49 PM)RockHard Wrote:  Book by Bart Baggett, who makes the graph-o-deck product (prop) that RJ supposedly liked, you can read it all online from what I can tell

http://books.google.com/books/about/Hand...N-wBf8pIUC

The thing is, it's like astrology, you can just make shit up. Skim the book for some ideas but what you want to do is highlight some fun qualities and then maybe tease a bit... Maybe suggest that she's impulsive or a bit vain. You just need enough framework to have talking points like "oh, you cross your t more to the right your're impulsive".

I used Bart Baggett's system. Women would always say it was accurate. He is a Forensic Handwriting Expert. You promote it as a scientific system. Handwriting reveals clues about the unconscious mind. I took his professional course, but with the graph-o-deck of graphology cards you can get started analyzing right away without knowing much and you make up the rest. His website may have it or Amazon. Or you can use another system. But the goal is just to use the analysis as a way of getting into her mind and talking about herself and from there you can spin off to other topics. One advantage is that she ends up telling you everything about herself in the first 10 minutes so you know what you are getting into.

Yeah, I see it's on Amazon for under $20. That seems like a good prop, then you just follow the deck, you don't have to worry about making up your own line.

Agree - the handwriting thing gets her talking and gives you stuff to work with. Much better than "so where are you from? What do you do for work?" bullshit that kills a conversation.

Post: #43

would you listen to financial advices from a guy who looks and talks like a shady used car dealer? why not? he could be a very smart individual??

how about showing his video to your friends and ask what they think?

(07-30-2014 08:46 PM)RockHard Wrote:  [quote='Sebastian' pid='794412' dateline='1406761566']
Am I the only one who gets creeped out by his whole look and vibe?

I don't mind a him talking about archaeology but dating advice? I just can't.....

So you'd only trust the advice of a guy who's good looking and dresses sharp?

Post: #44

The fact that Ross Jeffries is NOT good looking is reason enough to listen to him.

Post: #45

Women don't care about looks. That's a man's thing. I saw him do some of this stuff on women in person and it works more or less like in the video.

Post: #46

Every one want get stylish...

Post: #47

I've been reading through this thread and I'm quite intrigued. Where should a beginner start to learn the hypnotic ways of Ross Jefferies?

Post: #48

(08-18-2014 05:05 PM)Safado Wrote:  I've been reading through this thread and I'm quite intrigued. Where should a beginner start to learn the hypnotic ways of Ross Jefferies?

There's all kinds of stuff you can find on various sites
* Old layguide :http://www.pickupguide.com/layguide/index.html
* Search the torrent sites
* RJ has a channel on Youtube under the "speedseduction" user.
* Ross was covered somewhat in Strauss' The Game
* a few videos floating around (I linked one earlier in the thread)
* There was another player who went by Major Mark who was a pro hypnotist, it's worth looking him up too.

I'd recommend RJ's audio or video if you can get it. Audio is good enough. Most of this you won't get from reading it, you need to hear it in action. Really, the Louis Thereoux video I linked earlier is awesome. Watch how his vocal tone changes over the course of the first couple minutes. He just drops into it so easily.

Also, some of the NLP stuff is highly suspect, in my opinion. Does "below me" really turn into "blow me" in her head? How do you translate that into Portugese? I think it's more about setting up a hypnotic vocal tone and painting pictures with your words.

Post: #49

My belief is that while Jeffries has some good ideas, I don't think they're enough to create a coherent system.

Post: #50

Seeing RJ on some British TV program (presented by Louis Threaux), RJ has good conversation abilities, dominant with voice and no such thing as AA. That on its own is enough to get results withou the add ons.