Post: #426

(09-28-2018 02:37 PM)ksbms Wrote:  I dedicate this post to Subterfuge.

Adam is getting better and better hanging out with SA guys. He really does shine in this video, and it's a day and night between him and Tony Hustle (and what is it with him having his face covered? I actually don't accept - if you position yourself as a pro-level instructor, there's no space for that).

I like Adam's works. He doesn't have that firing on all cylinders energy of Richard's but he's good. He's fun, confident, relaxed, conversations flow naturally and he does the qualification for most of the time as smoothly as heat clarifies the unsalted butter. It's still uneven, sometimes better, sometimes worse (and doubt the've chosen the best recordings anyway) but it does look to me very genuine and credible. That's how to do daygame/gutter game at solid intermediate level (which is still ahead of me, no doubt about it).

Doing the odd daygame approaches here and there I did this exact thing on a local Aussie girl for a trial run.
It didn't take long for her to run the boyfriend line considering she was waiting in a busy area.

Gonna test this more because that kind of opener didn't make a difference as demonstrated in this video anyway.
This is assuming it's done in a sarcastic and humorous manner as you should and not in a really negative way.

Out of all these daygamers who put themselves out there on YouTube, Richard's vibe is pretty much right up there.





While we're on the same topic of these guys I don't know how youse look at it but the thumbnail of Richard personifying inner thirst waiting to be unleashed never gets old. Just look at him.

Post: #427

Finally diagnosed some issues with why I was getting such bad results doing daygame in downtown San Francisco — it's because I was gaming in the heart of the financial district during rush hour!

It took me a couple mass approach sessions of 20+ approaches, getting tons of blowouts, before I realized the problem was not with me, it was with the logistics of the girls. My approach to number ratio in these circumstances is literally 20 to 1. So many girls have their heads down and are headed to the ferries, or to meet a friend for happy hour, or to catch their train.

Then, I ended up moving to another city about a third of the size for the summer. I did daygame there and mostly approached girls that were lazily walking around or lounging on college campuses. My approach to number ratio was 3 to 1!

Not sure why I didn't realize this before - I thought I was terrible at daygame, but this was a huge breakthrough for me and gave me a lot more confidence. No more rush hour game.

Post: #428

Don't know about that. I find day game more interesting. Night/club game isn't at it used to be back in the days. Nowadays you don't even need to "game" in a club setting, all you gotta do is have a table and bottle service coming and you set.

Post: #429

(10-20-2018 10:34 PM)corsega Wrote:  Finally diagnosed some issues with why I was getting such bad results doing daygame in downtown San Francisco — it's because I was gaming in the heart of the financial district during rush hour!

(10-20-2018 10:34 PM)corsega Wrote:  Not sure why I didn't realize this before - I thought I was terrible at daygame, but this was a huge breakthrough for me and gave me a lot more confidence. No more rush hour game.

Logistics selection plays a major rule both in NG and DG. I assume you meant rush hours at the close of business day, not early morning hours. I've experienced the same.

Besides, office girls are a poor choice as per explore/exploit algorithm which illustrates a problem of a trade off over time. It has originally been applied to computer science, then applied to other fields, but I think we can derive important lesson in respect of DG. I have no proof, it's just a maxim which basically goes like this:

Conjecture:

As girls age, they tend to put premium on exploitative choices (dads) and forgo explorative ones (cads).

In human-speak, people have tendency to stick to things they like because they don't like (costly) disappointments and run out of time (one day you're going to die or, in case of a fertile woman, she'll hit menopause eventually, thus risking no offspring(s) if she keeps experimenting and stays undecided for too long). However, because human often, to decide what they like, need to experience the things they'll begin to prefer, first they need to try them and decide if they like them or not. By analogy, young girls will be much more open to versatile experiences, whereas the older they get, the more they know what they like/favour and become closed off to the disliked/disfavoured or the unknown with a potentially poor (or even disastrous) return. Another example is a situation when a person moves to a new town. First you'll try a bunch of restaurants (explorative period), and as time goes by, you'll begin to settle for the ones that give you the best pay off (exploitative period) because you just don't want to keep trying food you may not like and waste your time to find a new restaurant when you know can go to the ones you like and have it guaranteed to satisfy your palate. Thus, additionally to the maxim, we have a

Corollary:

You should always, no matter your age, go for as legally young girls as possible as you're comfortable with to maximise your return

because young women, by definition, having experienced little to nothing, need to try many different foods before they'll figure out whether it is spicy Thai or or sunny Mediterranean.

But let's go back to the best time to approach girls daytime.

In the UK, from my experience, it's around 4.45pm to 6.30pm (except London). Good luck stopping a hungry woman in a hurry to catch her transport back home and what not. Now, there's scientifically backed explanation behind that, Corsega. Look up Baumeister's research on ego depletion. In a nutshell, mental resources, after a a long, cognitively demanding day, just hit rock bottom, on average, late afternoon / early evening and majority of people will experience perceived fatigue and have much lower glycemic index than after lunch. If you can, game around lunch time - full bellies make girls happier!

I would say that during the week sweet spot starts around 12-1pm (lunch time in the UK), then a period of lull, and then it peaks around 3pm-5pm. Women that do not hold regular jobs and students will be in town. The streets are slower, everything is lazier and it isn't overcrowded. Of course, London, speaking of the UK, is an exception.

In the book Algorithms to Live By you'll have many other experiences. Being analytical guy, as you are, I can wholeheartedly recommend to you to to read that book. You won't be disappointed.

However, more interesting question is why did it take you so long to figure it out?

Post: #430

(10-21-2018 02:22 PM)ksbms Wrote:  However, more interesting question is why did it take you so long to figure it out?

Because I'm inexperienced at daygame and rarely have time to do it or reflect on it. Makes it hard to analyze, apply knowledge, and improve.

I've only done 378 approaches over 2.5 years in the game.

I also live 9 minutes away from the financial district of SF, and frequently go there to run errands for other things, while getting to the nearest large university is a 25 minute commitment, and out of my way.

Post: #431

Just bought that book based on your stellar post ksbms.

Post: #432

This evening I'm going to start a three week daygame challenge/experiment. I will approach 5 girls a day. Meanwhile, I will also swipe right on 50 girls a day on Tinder.

I will pay more attention than usual on Tinder to the girl's attractiveness, ensuring I only swipe certified 7+ girls. I will also make sure I only approach 7+ girls in the street. This will hopefully give some level of comparison about the effectiveness of each method. Once a week I will run a boost on Tinder as this is surely within most people's budget and could significantly alter the results.

Post: #433

(10-20-2018 12:34 AM)Crash_Bandicoot Wrote:  To answer the original question OP presented - "Is daygame the worst way to meet women?", I'll give my take on it:

I think it's a very inefficient way to meet/bang women

I'm going to get shit for saying that (because this is a game forum) but after making more than 500+ approaches, thats the conclusion I came to.

But this relates to my specific life.

Let me explain:

I work a corporate job 10 hours a day, am starting a side business, learning 2 languages, and have many, many other side projects I am working on. For me, time is a huge factor. And going out and getting ready and daygaming is very time consuming. I also live in a city where people are not too open and are always in a hurry. Making dozens upon dozens of approaches, having meaningless conversations, then setting up dates (i.e. text game), then going on those dates, then more text game, then inviting her over just for a lay/bang doesn't seem all that worth it. Why not just night game and go straight for the bang that night? Or just secure a date through online game?

So my conclusion is that it's not worth it.

However, I can say that I have gained a lot of "inner game" through daygame. I have learned how to have impromptu conversation, learned how to approach, and most importantly, learned how to accept rejection. The number of times I have gotten rejected is unbelievable, but I am not numb to it. This ability to not fear rejections has helped me enormously in my life in so many ways.

Nightgame is in comparison way more effective than daygame. But I believe you are missing one important factor. The strength of daygame is that you can approach virtually anywhere at any time. On your way to and from work, while you're grocery shopping, at the cafe, on your stroll at the park. You get the picture.

Plus it's a great way to meet girls when you're traveling. I agree on the rest.

Post: #434

(10-22-2018 10:53 AM)Riquelme Wrote:  This evening I'm going to start a three week daygame challenge/experiment. I will approach 5 girls a day. Meanwhile, I will also swipe right on 50 girls a day on Tinder.

I will pay more attention than usual on Tinder to the girl's attractiveness, ensuring I only swipe certified 7+ girls. I will also make sure I only approach 7+ girls in the street. This will hopefully give some level of comparison about the effectiveness of each method. Once a week I will run a boost on Tinder as this is surely within most people's budget and could significantly alter the results.

What conclusions do you imagine drawing from this experiment? How did you come up with 50 swipes vs. 5 approaches? It takes a lot less time to swipe right on 50 7+ girls than it does to approach 5 7+ girls.

What you should actually do is track TIME spent on either method. One hour approaching, one hour swiping.

Not even sure of the point, because assuming you're at least average SMV, online is so much more effective it's not even funny.

Post: #435

Main objective is to find out the difference in quality that can be achieved. I can already say that the quality of girls I'm chatting with and meeting from Daygame is far superior to those I've matched from Tinder.

Also, my Daygame leads are way stronger than those from Tinder. The Daygame girls are mostly very keen to meet. This means that I'm not wasting ages on "text game". The game was already done in real life - she knows she wants to.meet and doesn't need convinced. The texting is just a case of keeping them warm and organising the logistics of the meet.

I'm also not wasting time on text "conversations to nowhere" with girls I'll never meet. If she gives me her number and replies, she wants to meet and from then on it's don't mess up game. The often ignored timesink on Tinder is the lengthy text exchanges that often go nowhere.

Swiping on Tinder takes less time per girl. But I would argue that 5 good Daygame approaches in an hour is worth more than however many swipes you can get through in an hour.

Three days into my challenge I have three very strong leads with girls at least 1.5points hotter than I'm matching on tinder.

Post: #436

(10-25-2018 03:39 PM)Riquelme Wrote:  Main objective is to find out the difference in quality that can be achieved. I can already say that the quality of girls I'm chatting with and meeting from Daygame is far superior to those I've matched from Tinder.

Also, my Daygame leads are way stronger than those from Tinder. The Daygame girls are mostly very keen to meet. This means that I'm not wasting ages on "text game". The game was already done in real life - she knows she wants to.meet and doesn't need convinced. The texting is just a case of keeping them warm and organising the logistics of the meet.

I'm also not wasting time on text "conversations to nowhere" with girls I'll never meet. If she gives me her number and replies, she wants to meet and from then on it's don't mess up game. The often ignored timesink on Tinder is the lengthy text exchanges that often go nowhere.

Swiping on Tinder takes less time per girl. But I would argue that 5 good Daygame approaches in an hour is worth more than however many swipes you can get through in an hour.

Three days into my challenge I have three very strong leads with girls at least 1.5points hotter than I'm matching on tinder.

We must be living in different universes.

I match and meet up with hotter girls on Tinder than I do in daygame.

Girls on Tinder are MUCH easier to get out on a date, and they are down to fuck right away. Most of them come over to my house immediately.

Post: #437

Trying to see if anyone can identify a sticking point I'm having: very few of my approaches hook. Context is daygaming younger girls on a college campus.

My current process is:

Yad stop or front stop
Semi-direct open - "I actually walked past you over there and wanted to come meet you real fast. You had this sexy [description of clothes] vibe going on and I wanted to see what you were all about"
Cold read - "you look like a [cold read]"
Ramble on and tease her about her cold read answer, if nothing to talk about, ask another question until we settle on common ground
Continue to ramble, DHV, and tease her
Yes ladder - "Do you like [alcoholic beverage]?"
If yes, close - "We should grab a [beverage] sometime and continue this conversation when you're not [activity she's running off to]"

Of 10 approaches, I'd say:
4 are brush-offs, she ejects after 30 seconds, she's in a rush, etc.
3 give a boyfriend objection, fake or not
2 are number closes where the girl never hooks or asks a question about me
1 is a solid number close where the girl hooks and invests

What could I be doing wrong here?

Post: #438

(10-28-2018 03:21 PM)corsega Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 03:39 PM)Riquelme Wrote:  Main objective is to find out the difference in quality that can be achieved. I can already say that the quality of girls I'm chatting with and meeting from Daygame is far superior to those I've matched from Tinder.

Also, my Daygame leads are way stronger than those from Tinder. The Daygame girls are mostly very keen to meet. This means that I'm not wasting ages on "text game". The game was already done in real life - she knows she wants to.meet and doesn't need convinced. The texting is just a case of keeping them warm and organising the logistics of the meet.

I'm also not wasting time on text "conversations to nowhere" with girls I'll never meet. If she gives me her number and replies, she wants to meet and from then on it's don't mess up game. The often ignored timesink on Tinder is the lengthy text exchanges that often go nowhere.

Swiping on Tinder takes less time per girl. But I would argue that 5 good Daygame approaches in an hour is worth more than however many swipes you can get through in an hour.

Three days into my challenge I have three very strong leads with girls at least 1.5points hotter than I'm matching on tinder.

We must be living in different universes.

I match and meet up with hotter girls on Tinder than I do in daygame.

Girls on Tinder are MUCH easier to get out on a date, and they are down to fuck right away. Most of them come over to my house immediately.

Yes, I had some success from online too. But the main differentiator should be the skills acquired by doing day game .

If you practiced day game, you would be able pull in real life when the opportunities are there. You going to Starbuck, girl is giving you IOI's then you can pull. You are in hotel bar for business, you see a girl you pull.

But again I think online is way more efficient .

Post: #439

(10-28-2018 03:33 PM)corsega Wrote:  Trying to see if anyone can identify a sticking point I'm having: very few of my approaches hook. Context is daygaming younger girls on a college campus.

My current process is:

Yad stop or front stop
Semi-direct open - "I actually walked past you over there and wanted to come meet you real fast. You had this sexy [description of clothes] vibe going on and I wanted to see what you were all about"
Cold read - "you look like a [cold read]"
Ramble on and tease her about her cold read answer, if nothing to talk about, ask another question until we settle on common ground
Continue to ramble, DHV, and tease her
Yes ladder - "Do you like [alcoholic beverage]?"
If yes, close - "We should grab a [beverage] sometime and continue this conversation when you're not [activity she's running off to]"

Of 10 approaches, I'd say:
4 are brush-offs, she ejects after 30 seconds, she's in a rush, etc.
3 give a boyfriend objection, fake or not
2 are number closes where the girl never hooks or asks a question about me
1 is a solid number close where the girl hooks and invests

What could I be doing wrong here?

How are your non-verbals? Tonality, body language, facial expressions, presentation/appearance. Are you going for girls that you would say are at least as attractive as you and upwards?

If we agree that a 50% number close rate is good than you're not far off.

Post: #440

Maybe you just live in an awful city for daygame. That being said it's possible that:

-You're going for too fast moving girls
-You should go for girls sitting in a park/cafe, or shopping, or at an event, or doing something else by themselves. Street stops have the lowest chance of conversion IME.

Post: #441

corsega Wrote:Of 10 approaches, I'd say:
4 are brush-offs, she ejects after 30 seconds, she's in a rush, etc.
3 give a boyfriend objection, fake or not
2 are number closes where the girl never hooks or asks a question about me
1 is a solid number close where the girl hooks and invests

These are solid numbers.

Do more approaches, if you want more girls.

Simple as that.

(10-28-2018 03:44 PM)Trent W. Wrote:  If we agree that a 50% number close rate is good than you're not far off.

The only number that matters in street approaches is dates from those approaches (and the only number that matters in dates is the bangs).

He is getting 1 date out of 10 approaches: that's practically PUA guru level.

Post: #442

Would need more detail e.g. How old are you, how would you rate your looks, or more specifically pictures, which country are you in and what is your nationality? Doing much better on tinder than in daygame is very rare in my experience unless you haves some killer pics or are exotic in some way. Numbers without a hook are strange, try to force a question on her part, to get her invested. Possibly you still ask to many questions, rely even more on different stacks, story telling and assumptions about her. But to be honest, its all guess work, given the limited info in a short post.

Post: #443

(10-28-2018 03:44 PM)Trent W. Wrote:  

(10-28-2018 03:33 PM)corsega Wrote:  Trying to see if anyone can identify a sticking point I'm having: very few of my approaches hook. Context is daygaming younger girls on a college campus.

My current process is:

Yad stop or front stop
Semi-direct open - "I actually walked past you over there and wanted to come meet you real fast. You had this sexy [description of clothes] vibe going on and I wanted to see what you were all about"
Cold read - "you look like a [cold read]"
Ramble on and tease her about her cold read answer, if nothing to talk about, ask another question until we settle on common ground
Continue to ramble, DHV, and tease her
Yes ladder - "Do you like [alcoholic beverage]?"
If yes, close - "We should grab a [beverage] sometime and continue this conversation when you're not [activity she's running off to]"

Of 10 approaches, I'd say:
4 are brush-offs, she ejects after 30 seconds, she's in a rush, etc.
3 give a boyfriend objection, fake or not
2 are number closes where the girl never hooks or asks a question about me
1 is a solid number close where the girl hooks and invests

What could I be doing wrong here?

How are your non-verbals? Tonality, body language, facial expressions, presentation/appearance. Are you going for girls that you would say are at least as attractive as you and upwards?

If we agree that a 50% number close rate is good than you're not far off.

Non-verbals are good. I am in my late 20s/early 30s, I speak in a low, confident voice with alpha tonality. I am almost completely looksmaxed. I'm jacked and dress to show it off. I dress like a "fuckboy". I go for girls that are 6.5s and above. I consider myself a male 5.5/6 and impossible to improve any more than that due to face/genetics.

(10-28-2018 03:46 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  Maybe you just live in an awful city for daygame. That being said it's possible that:

-You're going for too fast moving girls
-You should go for girls sitting in a park/cafe, or shopping, or at an event, or doing something else by themselves. Street stops have the lowest chance of conversion IME.

Yes, I do live in a poor city for daygame. In fact, it's literally the worst city for daygame I've ever been to. San Francisco.

I almost always do moving sets. There are very few seated sets around and I'm not too comfortable with them so far (I like it when the girl has an out because I'm very direct/polarizing).

P.S. to the guy saying I'm getting 1 date per 10 approaches, that's not accurate. I get one number, of the numbers I get only 10-15% convert into an actual date. So I have about 400 approaches lifetime and 15 dates.

I would love to send guys some infield of me if it would help. A couple forum members have provided feedback about my sets lately. PM me if you think you can help, I would very much appreciate it!

Post: #444

Personally what I would do:

Just try going for more seated sets or girls moving very very slowly. If so, go slightly more indirect. Then just try rambling on for as long as you can, maybe even for 30 minutes if the girl allows it. Try to develop a stronger connection. And try to screen for girls who would hook well.

SF seems like a city about as bad or maybe even worse than mine, however as far as I know it's denser. But I can relate.

If you want you can BCC/PM me your infields. I can't make any promises that I can give good advice though.

Post: #445

My humble opinion is that stuff about seated/unseated, moving/non-moving sets etc. is of value only to beginners.

As long as you are past the anxiety stage, and can talk to anyone, and have maxed out your looks, none of that stuff matters. What matters is talking to enough girls to find the ones who are up for meeting strangers and doing something with them. These are a VERY SMALL percentage of the decent-looking girls on the street on any given day, and you have to do some SERIOUS approaching in terms of sheer quantity in order to find them, not to mention that they must be reasonably into your looks and attitude (which past a certain point can't be altered) in order to legit go out with you (as opposed to merely giving you a bs number).

If a girl is DTF, and she likes the look of you, you can make things happen with her even with awkward approaches, regardless of seated/unseated or moving/unmoving status, etc. I have literally gotten girls by dropping a note with my number on it on their laps through the closing doors of a subway train for fuck's sakes. Just go out and approach anything that moves that you even remotely feel attracted to, while working relentlessly on your looks and inner game, and things will happen for you to the degree that your genetics will allow things to happen.

Post: #446

(10-28-2018 08:47 PM)corsega Wrote:  

(10-28-2018 03:44 PM)Trent W. Wrote:  

(10-28-2018 03:33 PM)corsega Wrote:  Trying to see if anyone can identify a sticking point I'm having: very few of my approaches hook. Context is daygaming younger girls on a college campus.

My current process is:

Yad stop or front stop
Semi-direct open - "I actually walked past you over there and wanted to come meet you real fast. You had this sexy [description of clothes] vibe going on and I wanted to see what you were all about"
Cold read - "you look like a [cold read]"
Ramble on and tease her about her cold read answer, if nothing to talk about, ask another question until we settle on common ground
Continue to ramble, DHV, and tease her
Yes ladder - "Do you like [alcoholic beverage]?"
If yes, close - "We should grab a [beverage] sometime and continue this conversation when you're not [activity she's running off to]"

Of 10 approaches, I'd say:
4 are brush-offs, she ejects after 30 seconds, she's in a rush, etc.
3 give a boyfriend objection, fake or not
2 are number closes where the girl never hooks or asks a question about me
1 is a solid number close where the girl hooks and invests

What could I be doing wrong here?

How are your non-verbals? Tonality, body language, facial expressions, presentation/appearance. Are you going for girls that you would say are at least as attractive as you and upwards?

If we agree that a 50% number close rate is good than you're not far off.

Non-verbals are good. I am in my late 20s/early 30s, I speak in a low, confident voice with alpha tonality. I am almost completely looksmaxed. I'm jacked and dress to show it off. I dress like a "fuckboy". I go for girls that are 6.5s and above. I consider myself a male 5.5/6 and impossible to improve any more than that due to face/genetics.

(10-28-2018 03:46 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  Maybe you just live in an awful city for daygame. That being said it's possible that:

-You're going for too fast moving girls
-You should go for girls sitting in a park/cafe, or shopping, or at an event, or doing something else by themselves. Street stops have the lowest chance of conversion IME.

Yes, I do live in a poor city for daygame. In fact, it's literally the worst city for daygame I've ever been to. San Francisco.

I almost always do moving sets. There are very few seated sets around and I'm not too comfortable with them so far (I like it when the girl has an out because I'm very direct/polarizing).

P.S. to the guy saying I'm getting 1 date per 10 approaches, that's not accurate. I get one number, of the numbers I get only 10-15% convert into an actual date. So I have about 400 approaches lifetime and 15 dates.

I would love to send guys some infield of me if it would help. A couple forum members have provided feedback about my sets lately. PM me if you think you can help, I would very much appreciate it!

Do you audio-record yourself? This can help massively, it's an invaluable feedback to hear yourself in each set and you can push it anyone for feedback too. Ocenaudio is free and supereasy to edit and cut out sensitive parts. If you've never listened to your approaches, I can guarantee you'll be very surprised with the discrepancy between what you think happened and what actually happened. All the audio infidels I've heard (of myself and others) never matched audio with the visuals. Meaning, guys did nice guy approaches, whereas they were dressed as bad boys (and thought they were doing bad body approaches but you'd never guess upon listening to the audio). You will also notice interesting cues in girls' pitch, timber, speed and so forth. You'll improve a lot, quickly.

Do you look somewhat congruent whilst on campus? If you do the badboy style game, do you stand closer than customary? Strong eye-contact from the opener? Touch them?

Post: #447

(10-29-2018 08:38 AM)ksbms Wrote:  

(10-28-2018 08:47 PM)corsega Wrote:  

(10-28-2018 03:44 PM)Trent W. Wrote:  

(10-28-2018 03:33 PM)corsega Wrote:  Trying to see if anyone can identify a sticking point I'm having: very few of my approaches hook. Context is daygaming younger girls on a college campus.

My current process is:

Yad stop or front stop
Semi-direct open - "I actually walked past you over there and wanted to come meet you real fast. You had this sexy [description of clothes] vibe going on and I wanted to see what you were all about"
Cold read - "you look like a [cold read]"
Ramble on and tease her about her cold read answer, if nothing to talk about, ask another question until we settle on common ground
Continue to ramble, DHV, and tease her
Yes ladder - "Do you like [alcoholic beverage]?"
If yes, close - "We should grab a [beverage] sometime and continue this conversation when you're not [activity she's running off to]"

Of 10 approaches, I'd say:
4 are brush-offs, she ejects after 30 seconds, she's in a rush, etc.
3 give a boyfriend objection, fake or not
2 are number closes where the girl never hooks or asks a question about me
1 is a solid number close where the girl hooks and invests

What could I be doing wrong here?

How are your non-verbals? Tonality, body language, facial expressions, presentation/appearance. Are you going for girls that you would say are at least as attractive as you and upwards?

If we agree that a 50% number close rate is good than you're not far off.

Non-verbals are good. I am in my late 20s/early 30s, I speak in a low, confident voice with alpha tonality. I am almost completely looksmaxed. I'm jacked and dress to show it off. I dress like a "fuckboy". I go for girls that are 6.5s and above. I consider myself a male 5.5/6 and impossible to improve any more than that due to face/genetics.

(10-28-2018 03:46 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  Maybe you just live in an awful city for daygame. That being said it's possible that:

-You're going for too fast moving girls
-You should go for girls sitting in a park/cafe, or shopping, or at an event, or doing something else by themselves. Street stops have the lowest chance of conversion IME.

Yes, I do live in a poor city for daygame. In fact, it's literally the worst city for daygame I've ever been to. San Francisco.

I almost always do moving sets. There are very few seated sets around and I'm not too comfortable with them so far (I like it when the girl has an out because I'm very direct/polarizing).

P.S. to the guy saying I'm getting 1 date per 10 approaches, that's not accurate. I get one number, of the numbers I get only 10-15% convert into an actual date. So I have about 400 approaches lifetime and 15 dates.

I would love to send guys some infield of me if it would help. A couple forum members have provided feedback about my sets lately. PM me if you think you can help, I would very much appreciate it!

Do you audio-record yourself? This can help massively, it's an invaluable feedback to hear yourself in each set and you can push it anyone for feedback too. Ocenaudio is free and supereasy to edit and cut out sensitive parts. If you've never listened to your approaches, I can guarantee you'll be very surprised with the discrepancy between what you think happened and what actually happened. All the audio infidels I've heard (of myself and others) never matched audio with the visuals. Meaning, guys did nice guy approaches, whereas they were dressed as bad boys (and thought they were doing bad body approaches but you'd never guess upon listening to the audio). You will also notice interesting cues in girls' pitch, timber, speed and so forth. You'll improve a lot, quickly.

Do you look somewhat congruent whilst on campus? If you do the badboy style game, do you stand closer than customary? Strong eye-contact from the opener? Touch them?

I audio and video record every set with a hidden wearable camera. "Laser eye contact" with every approach. I have an intimidating look and am often so forceful that I get blown out.

Post: #448

(10-29-2018 08:38 AM)ksbms Wrote:  All the audio infidels I've heard

Allahu akbar! Now that's an opener I've never heard recommended.

Post: #449

(10-30-2018 07:22 AM)sethg Wrote:  

(10-29-2018 08:38 AM)ksbms Wrote:  All the audio infidels I've heard

Allahu akbar! Now that's an opener I've never heard recommended.

Apocalyptic opener -- in more sense than one.

Post: #450

(10-28-2018 08:47 PM)corsega Wrote:  Yes, I do live in a poor city for daygame. In fact, it's literally the worst city for daygame I've ever been to. San Francisco.

I almost always do moving sets. There are very few seated sets around and I'm not too comfortable with them so far (I like it when the girl has an out because I'm very direct/polarizing).

P.S. to the guy saying I'm getting 1 date per 10 approaches, that's not accurate. I get one number, of the numbers I get only 10-15% convert into an actual date. So I have about 400 approaches lifetime and 15 dates.

I would love to send guys some infield of me if it would help. A couple forum members have provided feedback about my sets lately. PM me if you think you can help, I would very much appreciate it!

You can hit on a girl anywhere but certain setups tend to yield higher percentages on average. For me, walking sets outside have the lowest percentage success rate because the girl is moving and going somewhere. Seated sets have the highest success rate because she is in position to more likely engage in a conversation with you. The safer and more relaxed the environment, the higher percentage my success rate tends to be.

However, none of the above should matter except when you are trying to maximize your time. Obviously, you need to get good at approaching all types of sets because you will want that flexibility as you don't know where that great girl might be. You need to get to the point where you can game a girl at a moment's notice and it doesn't matter the situation: grocery store, airport, train, street, waiting at the doctor's office, etc.

So change your perspective from you don't want to do certain sets. Start doing all the kinds of sets and be open minded about it. With a little practice, you will get good at seated sets and other kinds. This is also helpful in terms of sheer numbers because it will allow you to make more sets and be able to game in more places.

I would also look at changing some of your limiting beliefs like that you are very direct or polarizing. This may be true at the moment but it is not productive for you. Instead, allow yourself the opportunity to experiment with indirect approach. Give yourself several months of experience where you can say you truly have tested out these other methods and kinds of sets.

In terms of the actual approaches, you are following the London Daygame model which is just fine. It looks like others are helping you with other subtleties. The one thing I would add in is some safe chic conversation such as asking about travel, foreign languages, movies, etc. If you are struggling with things to say, this can be a good way to get her to open up more and with these topics it is easier to build some scripted stories that you can say again and again.

Plus, this is a good way to build a connection with the girl and to make you more grounded. By grounded, I mean you tell her things about yourself that show you are not a clown and are truly a regular person that has a genuine interest in seeing her. This will result in less number flaking and by extending the conversation, you will also have more information about her you can potentially use when texting with her.

If you keep after it, I am sure you will be amazed at how much progress you make in a few short months.