(02-18-2015 10:30 AM)ManVsMachine Wrote:  ....

But Americans - can't we just see it all around us? Unless you're in a select few cities, you just simply aren't seeing 7.5-9/10 women around. Even since 5 years ago the market has dried up for very attractive women. More and more of the few hot women around are becoming WAGs to athletes, or jumping into harem of very successful men.


One final thing to note is that - there ARE 8/10s on Tinder. And there are D1/pro athletes who use Tinder. The location services of Tinder+ will help them pair off easier.

This is relevant:

http://www.gq.com/entertainment/sports/2...rentPage=1

It has become easier to meet girls on sugar-daddy sites and move them away from the paying area via Game than meeting them on any other site.

There are huge numbers of girls who are either fucking famous or wealthy men either for kicks or simple money.

This destabilization of sexual behaviors has happened before in the past - for example during the first Bolshevik revolution where pretty girls moved into houses of wealthy men and lived there 20 at a time, while the majority of Beta men had nothing.

Yeah - for athletes getting pussy is like shooting fish in a barrel. Or they could use Instagram or other social media sites and have the girls come over - it's more convenient than Tinder for them.

Today was the first day I bounced into the "like wall". If people think a woman is going to pay for tinder you are going to see two things;

1: Less hookups all-round as women become choosier or bored of limitations
2: More women who seek relationships like Match.com

The 80/20 rule will become 90/10. You won't see a guy with 100+ likes in a week unless he is a top tier guy and even then guys like that have other avenues of interest.

I've received over 100 matches since Sunday when I deleted my former account after three very dry days last Thursday to Saturday evening when I thought the Valentine's factor would have helped.

Yesterday, I paid for one month of Tinder+ and set my location to London. There, my match rate has easily hit 40% (London is just beyond the maximum distance ranger in Tinder Mk1). Those in London with hundreds of thousands seem to have a wealth of opportunity.

If you're pulling numbers like that. and you aren't getting bots.
You need to drop a breakdown of what youre doing on tinder

(02-18-2015 12:34 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  If you're pulling numbers like that. and you aren't getting bots.
You need to drop a breakdown of what youre doing on tinder

I'll see what I can do. In the previous page of this thread, I speculated that things got better when I opened the iTunes Tinder rating page whenever prompted.

Even before, I tried out Tinder+ which may have put me to the front of the queues, I got a lot of matches on Sunday and Monday.

I've followed the standard rules:

*No more than 4 pictures,
*Main picture is a 'handsome' head and shoulders shot - not looking at the camera, secondary pictures involve a suit picture and an action picture. I am tall and thin so the big chest picture is not an option.
*Profile text is short, but unique and to the point and I added my 6 foot+ height to the top line of it
*I try to limit my swipes to peak hours
*I have liked designer clothes brands on FB and good cocktail bars and clubs in my area
*I have also FB liked magazines that I suspect attractive women would read without looking gay. Ie Horse and Hounds rather than Cosmo, Women's Health rather than Women's Weekly. This is basic market research.

I should add that I am 35 so I am older than 85% of Tinder's demographic, yet the hottest leads that I have are from 21 and 23 year olds. Women in their early 30s are asking me out for drinks but there is no flirting from the over 30s as they are probably feigning relationships.

Gentlemen,

First of all thank you for being here and your valuable contributions to this priceless resource! Been reading forum for over six months and it changed my life! Finally decided to share something.

With recent reincarnation of my tinder account I chose to experiment with hypothetical 'pickiness' metric. This time I created a new FB with different E-mail and for the very first time was asked for a phone number to register. Thus the new account should be completely detached from previous ones.

For majority of my 'swipes' I use the commercial version of 'Liker for Tinder' by Hype Reactor, Inc. ver. 1.3. Had to pay for it a whopping $0.99 last August. It provides in-app location change, shows a hundred profiles per load, and still allows unlimited swipes. I guess Tinder do not enforce these limits on the server yet to support existing older clients. Also Liker shows likes/passes statistics on the auto liker settings page.

Per session I was 'liking' 200-500 profiles in my area (south CA) quickly deselecting obvious ugly ones with an approximate ratio 1 pass per 9 likes. Then I set location to some remote metroplex and dislike ten times as many profiles liking an occassional one or two hottest ones appearing on the first page on Liker to reduce the chance of mass swiper detection on server. The entire session takes about 20 minutes. Using this technique for a week I liked 12500 profiles and disliked 125K.

I can tell that Tinder does start showing perceivably hotter ones after disliking 300-500 profiles. Number and quality of human matches, however, stays the same -- about a dozen a week. Duh… I have to improve my photos!
So it's hard to tell if being picky moves you up in the girls' line based on this experiment. Maybe someone with popular pictures could make a similar test.

Can not representatively compare to previous account due to following additional variable changes:
- Tinder switched to the limited version requiring payments which disrupted the entire process;
- I changed age on account from 33 to 25 to see if I make it in the girls' parameter filter;
- Did not like a bunch of pages on FB this time.

On average Tinder shows younger girls to my new 25 y.o. account compared to previous 33 y.o. one despite of the same age filter setting. Matches are also younger. My age filter is set to the maximum range since I noticed that some legit girls put a ridiculous age, like 100. Never matched with any of those, however.
So it appears to be a good idea for older guys to set younger age in the account and state 'looks' age in bio. I say 28 in mine.

Cheers!

(02-18-2015 12:46 PM)N°6 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:34 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  If you're pulling numbers like that. and you aren't getting bots.
You need to drop a breakdown of what youre doing on tinder

I'll see what I can do. In the previous page of this thread, I speculated that things got better when I opened the iTunes Tinder rating page whenever prompted.

Even before, I tried out Tinder+ which may have put me to the front of the queues, I got a lot of matches on Sunday and Monday.

I've followed the standard rules:

*No more than 4 pictures,
*Main picture is a 'handsome' head and shoulders shot - not looking at the camera, secondary pictures involve a suit picture and an action picture. I am tall and thin so the big chest picture is not an option.
*Profile text is short, but unique and to the point and I added my 6 foot+ height to the top line of it
*I try to limit my swipes to peak hours
*I have liked designer clothes brands on FB and good cocktail bars and clubs in my area
*I have also FB liked magazines that I suspect attractive women would read without looking gay. Ie Horse and Hounds rather than Cosmo, Women's Health rather than Women's Weekly. This is basic market research.

I should add that I am 35 so I am older than 85% of Tinder's demographic, yet the hottest leads that I have are from 21 and 23 year olds. Women in their early 30s are asking me out for drinks but there is no flirting from the over 30s as they are probably feigning relationships.

So you are pulling a lot of older chicks?
I have a friend in his mid thirties that ends up with a lot of matches.. majority around his age and more than not that aren't great looking at all.
Chicks in their 30s on tinder are usually pretty beat.
Besides that..Its all bots.

Some days I get a smile when I get a couple new matches and half of them are bots.

Secondly...How many are you turning into actual bangs. because..matches don't equate to bangs

Deleted my Tinder profile. Until now, when I've done that and re-booted, I would get zilch. I have some quite good photos.

If I keep it deleted for just over a week or two weeks, I get way more matches and go to the front of the line. 40 matches in one day in a city of about 500,000, so definitely gotta cool it and Work the leads I already have.

As for openers, it's good if you keep it brief, but personalized and original. So, for instance, just writing "[her name]!" exclamation point, often gets a reaction, because there's nothing disqualifying you in there. After that, I try to move straight to her qualifying herself to me.

My plan for now is to stick a lot more to the M3 model, since I've forgotten a lot of basic game stuff apparently and am reeling from one-itis right now.

Do you unmatch after you get the #?

(02-18-2015 08:56 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:46 PM)N°6 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:34 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  If you're pulling numbers like that. and you aren't getting bots.
You need to drop a breakdown of what youre doing on tinder

I'll see what I can do. In the previous page of this thread, I speculated that things got better when I opened the iTunes Tinder rating page whenever prompted.

Even before, I tried out Tinder+ which may have put me to the front of the queues, I got a lot of matches on Sunday and Monday.

I've followed the standard rules:

*No more than 4 pictures,
*Main picture is a 'handsome' head and shoulders shot - not looking at the camera, secondary pictures involve a suit picture and an action picture. I am tall and thin so the big chest picture is not an option.
*Profile text is short, but unique and to the point and I added my 6 foot+ height to the top line of it
*I try to limit my swipes to peak hours
*I have liked designer clothes brands on FB and good cocktail bars and clubs in my area
*I have also FB liked magazines that I suspect attractive women would read without looking gay. Ie Horse and Hounds rather than Cosmo, Women's Health rather than Women's Weekly. This is basic market research.

I should add that I am 35 so I am older than 85% of Tinder's demographic, yet the hottest leads that I have are from 21 and 23 year olds. Women in their early 30s are asking me out for drinks but there is no flirting from the over 30s as they are probably feigning relationships.

So you are pulling a lot of older chicks?
I have a friend in his mid thirties that ends up with a lot of matches.. majority around his age and more than not that aren't great looking at all.
Chicks in their 30s on tinder are usually pretty beat.
Besides that..Its all bots.

Some days I get a smile when I get a couple new matches and half of them are bots.

Secondly...How many are you turning into actual bangs. because..matches don't equate to bangs

No as I said my hottest leads are 21 and 23, they both have the older man thing. The next good lead is 33 and attractive, she is suggesting that we meet next week. The average age of a match that I am getting is probably around 28.

The bots are getting better. Since I am convinced Toronto is ground zero for thirst I got hit with two new style bots.

Instead of the usual two pictures they now have three of better quality. The bio is more believe but still only around two lines. They have a soft open or reply, then will call you cute, then by name, then in capitals. They will give you thier number..

You text them and its a webcam bot. I believed the first one because she looked a dark meat loving white girl. Her fake number was from FL and the not types like shit. I literally thought she was a dumb American girl visiting. But then once you text them its all automatic crap that you know is fake.

The bots live on.

Seems you guys are having success by deleting for a week or more and going back. I've always deleted and went back no later than two days or so. Gonna try to hold off for a week and see if that helps me.

I feel like my pictures are pretty solid and I should be doing significantly better than I have been recently.

Why not create a completely new FB and reinstall with burner phone number?
This should make it appear to Tinder as totally different account.

Tinder is definitely f*cking with me. I can go 25-30 swipes now without a match. A few months ago I would get a match for every 10 swipes or less. I wondered at first if I had just gone through all the women here but that is impossible given the population of the area and how many people visit here everyday from other places and countries.

Changed age on FB from 25 to 28. Guess what, three days later the change reflected in the Tinder profile and I'm getting the flood of new profiles shown as if account was recreated. Obviously older ones this time. Age filter stays the same -- max range.

(02-20-2015 01:47 PM)Stun Wrote:  Tinder is definitely f*cking with me. I can go 25-30 swipes now without a match. A few months ago I would get a match for every 10 swipes or less. I wondered at first if I had just gone through all the women here but that is impossible given the population of the area and how many people visit here everyday from other places and countries.

Same here. I haven't gone through and done a complete profile overhaul. Much like anything in game, Tinder requires more attention and perfecting, especially in smaller user areas like mine. I can only imagine the gold mine in major cities like NYC, LA, Miami, or Vegas.

Done a few tests with this here Tinder. Its worse than you expect guys.

The test was between me and a friend. As you know Tinder restricts users to a set number of "likes". WHich to any average intelligent person is the green, swipe right mechanism in place.

Not so.

It means a set number of profiles, regardless of you swiping left or right. I know this because I did a full swipe left and so did my friend.

"You have run out of likes today". Without a doubt this has ruined Tinder for women and a lot of guys outside the top %. A woman as you know is incredibly picky so she is more likely to shift through more profiles to find a decent profile she likes.

Whats to say she gets bored of this limited bullshit ploy and leaves Tinder? Why wouldn't she? Young hot women get enough attention to not give a shit, Tinder just hid her slutty behaviour better so she will seek out the next best thing to continue.

We will be left with attention whores demanding we add them on social media with nay a fuck given to any man unless you have more followers than her.


So the key thing now is to find the next Tinder and get ahead of the curve.

Did you set profile gender to 'woman' in this test? ; )

In support to losing interest to Tinder I observe an unusual spike of girls' activity on OKC. Without changing any of my habits there now I suddenly get 2-3 messages a day instead of 1-2 per week.

(02-21-2015 04:55 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  Done a few tests with this here Tinder. Its worse than you expect guys.

The test was between me and a friend. As you know Tinder restricts users to a set number of "likes". WHich to any average intelligent person is the green, swipe right mechanism in place.

Not so.

It means a set number of profiles, regardless of you swiping left or right. I know this because I did a full swipe left and so did my friend.

"You have run out of likes today". Without a doubt this has ruined Tinder for women and a lot of guys outside the top %. A woman as you know is incredibly picky so she is more likely to shift through more profiles to find a decent profile she likes.

Whats to say she gets bored of this limited bullshit ploy and leaves Tinder? Why wouldn't she? Young hot women get enough attention to not give a shit, Tinder just hid her slutty behaviour better so she will seek out the next best thing to continue.

Exactly - rejected dude counts as much as a liked dude, that's why some good-looking buddies of mine who used Tinder often suddenly reported a massive drop in matches. She already ditched 45 dudes and likely only 5 strike her fancy. Before she comes to your profile even as a very attractive guy, it can take a long time now.

All the arguments about super-smart people working at Tinder are missing the point that big companies do major multi-billion dollar blunders non-stop. Decisions are sometimes made despite the objections of the smartest people in the companies. I have worked in enough corporations to know that they do shit all the time.

(02-21-2015 05:06 PM)Clark Wrote:  Did you set profile gender to 'woman' in this test? ; )

In support to losing interest to Tinder I observe an unusual spike of girls' activity on OKC. Without changing any of my habits there now I suddenly get 2-3 messages a day instead of 1-2 per week.

I agree. To get the fill effect test you would have to run a test also posing as a 'woman'.

I have a feeling the algorithm changes for each type of gender preference.

I'm not setting another facebook profile up to act as a woman just to prove that the Tinder app is restricting profile looks to get cash out of you. If a womans profile isn't shafted then how does that help? They still want money. It is a classic pay wall which makes multi-millionaires. These guys at Tinder want a lot of money and they hope a tidal wave of thirst will make it happen.

I will keep to Tinder but I will not pay for it. My time is better spent looking for something better and keeping to real life interactions.

I am hearing that Tinder is quoting different swipe fees to different men. I was quoted circa £2.99 but I am told that some men are faced with £7.99.

eg

"Martin has ran out of Tinder likes and apparently has to pay £8 a month for more, he has 19 hours til he gets more. Raging is not the word."

https://twitter.com/NeilMackinnon94/stat...3613085698

(02-22-2015 06:21 AM)N°6 Wrote:  I am hearing that Tinder is quoting different swipe fees to different men. I was quoted circa £2.99 but I am told that some men are faced with £7.99.

eg

"Martin has ran out of Tinder likes and apparently has to pay £8 a month for more, he has 19 hours til he gets more. Raging is not the word."

https://twitter.com/NeilMackinnon94/stat...3613085698

Yeah, apparently they're split-testing every price point they could think of. One dude on reddit got hit with 29 AUD/month. LOL.

Is this change server-side yet, though? Anyone of you tried using any of the unofficial Tinder clients for Chrome or Windows Phone (6tin)?

(02-22-2015 06:27 AM)Vice Wrote:  Is this change server-side yet, though? Anyone of you tried using any of the unofficial Tinder clients for Chrome or Windows Phone (6tin)?

Nope. Still plowing through hundreds of profiles a day with Liker (see above).

Being 'picky' seem to be working for me. Tried to reduce number of passes to number of likes and Tinder started showing me so trashy profiles, I couldn't believe!

I doubt that Tinder owners will invest serious effort into improving algorithms against bots, third-party clients, etc. Everything now is toward maximizing revenue. Check out the Facebook app reviews: everyone is complaining, but they don't give a damn. Why? Advertizing money keep pouring in.
Also the community employing advanced techniques of service use, like folks on this forum, is quite small. Why worry about these, while some good percentage of users will pay?

profile deleted, that shit was hurting my ability to cold approach