Post: #26

(06-17-2017 12:41 PM)Preston Blood Wrote:  I think that looks is always the entry point, game is just closing the deal.

I guess that's the general consensus. People like Mark Manson talk about 'yes girls' and 'no girls', and it seems that 'no girls' are girls who don't find you physically attractive and aren't receptive to you.

You can 'game' (tease / challenge ) these girls, but I guess doing so isn't gonna make them want to have sex with you.

Post: #27

It's not black and white.

There's also the situation where the guy is not ugly, but he's not especially attractive physically, and his image is not bad but average as well. The girl however has to be receptive to being gamed in general; this may buy the average guy just enough time to spit something, so if this average looking guy comes in and, depending on the location and environment, opens strong, and continues strong, she will go from "receptive in general" to "attracted to this (average looking) guy". This is what the "attraction" phase of "game" is, roughly. Getting girls who you would normally consider "out of your league" looks wise attracted and interested in you.

Of course it gets harder where competition is higher because the average looking guy will be surrounded by guys who at least without a word being said appear (key word: appear) to be better, stronger choices for the girl. Then when a girl gets spoiled for choice with such men, she will not even tolerate a single sentence from an average looking guy. It can be brutal. Some average guys with game however slip in under the radar by engaging in seemingly innocuous chat (the girl as above must at least be receptive in general/not blow you out instantly), and because the girls don't "expect" such strong game from this average looking guy, they get surprised and it has an even greater impact. I've seen this happen as well and obviously done it as I'm pretty average looking.

There are the Yes and No girls, but I also find there are "Neutral" girls.

With Yes girls, I just have to not fuck up. No girls, no chance. Neutral girls is where I feel I am "running game"...Sometimes I feel like I have to drop "bombs", even in social circle settings, to get a girl's emotions to start firing, even if they are on the surface, because as an average guy I need to "affect" her more. Not always negs per se in the strict sense, but often a really sharp tongue is indeed required. Sometimes she will submit or she will spar back so I may continue that for a while or just calm her down as if I am speaking to a child. The reaction I aim for is initially "What?! Who does this guy think he is?" or if the girl is calmer "What?! This guy sounds like bad news [I might like him]," then when I calm her down it is more "Wow this guy is a bit of an arrogant dick but he's also quite sweet as well [I like him]". Not that this happens every time, many times it falls flat on face, or girls just aren't receptive either to your game or what you thought was a "Neutral" was actually a "No" just leading you on. But what I'm saying is that Neutral girls/Difficult girls (when they are worth it, for me) can be done. Some of the best daygamers approach women in all sorts of strange situations and places and the women are more often initially surprised and skeptical, but not completely "No" to the whole situation. That buys the time for the "game" to proceed and it's how the average looking guys get a lot of these EE model types.

It also depends on where you meet the girl. If online, hell yeah it's 99% looks because what else is there to go on. If in loud nightclubs, you can do it but again it's geared up for more superficial interactions. Bars, depending on what type and what time of day can be less dependent on looks. Then of course you have social circle or any environment that gives you more than 30 seconds to pique her interest. If you see a certain girl regularly and she is receptive in general but at least neutral to you initially, you have far more chances and far more time to "game" her. Cold approaching is tough because it essentially packages you as an entire person within a window of just a few seconds long: impossible. It's like an audition with a record company where you're only allowed to play the first 5 seconds of your song; the song might be a potential multi platinum single, but most record companies will never find out, and how can they know after 5 seconds?

I agree that with No girls you generally can't do much and even in the rare case you could turn it around, it's not worth the effort. No girls can range from in a passionate committed relationship, militant feminist who hates all men, just broken up with ex-BF and hates all men at the moment, in a bad mood because they are girls etc. Yes girls require "don't fuck up" game while "Neutral" girls require what I would call more "traditional" game i.e. game which is focused on creating "attraction" which Mystery wrote about in such depth. However "game" in general is not just the front end of attraction, it's arguably more important to have the killer instinct of converting as many leads into lays as possible.

Post: #28

Thanks for the links and info blck. I appreciate your posts even though I still don't agree.

I feel like even if a guy does the kind of stuff or adopts the mindset in those posts you referenced, it will not necessarily connect in the absence of legitimate value.

Kind of like when you are driving a car with a clutch you have to get it to "hook up" in order to get the car moving which is something that is difficult at first when you are learning.

I feel like it's the same with girls. You have to be able to get things to "hook up" just like with a clutch and I see that as more value based than game based.

The game only comes in when you already have that "hook up" and now you just need to accelerate to high speed.

But when you don't have that, nothing seems to land whatsoever and now your frame goes down the garbage can too since you are now in the chasing and trying to prove yourself territory.

It seems strange to me to think that you can just control any woman any time in any way you want as if they don't have a mind of their own. Like as if, if you just stir some emotion you can get any girl to fuck you anywhere and any time. That they aren't complex individuals with their own world. Of which you may be able to interact with, but it just seems strange to me to think that you can completely control that, especially all the time and so consistently.

I think too that alot of that stuff is really hard to connect with simply because it is very intangible. E.g. thinking you are a "10" vs specific instructions like physical screening. It's just hard to connect the reading to "ok I am going out tonight and this how I will actually use this to score". It's not really a game plan and even if you embodied that thinking it's hard to link it to a actual action process that ends up with sex.

I feel like that what you said makes sense to me Skank_Hunt, I was more asking in the case of girls who just really aren't giving you anything whatsoever, rather than girls who are somewhat engaging but maybe giving you a bit of a hard time. "No" girls as you say.

If a girl is just giving you nothing whatsoever, it's hard for me to understand how you tease and challenge them and they suddenly turn around on you, when they are just giving you either total negativity or not even engaging with you at all.

Post: #29

OP serious question, do you think you're ugly? Because I have a feeling that the vast majority of guys that start these looks vs game posts think they are.

Post: #30

Quote:OP serious question, do you think you're ugly? Because I have a feeling that the vast majority of guys that start these looks vs game posts think they are.

I've done ok for myself but yes to an extent.

Not exactly ugly but probably just average and I am of the variety that feels like I would do alot better if I was a better looking guy.

By average I mean my overall package, I am actually fairly high in a few regards but have a few things that can't be changed that keep me from ever being top tier in looks.

And yes to this day, I am still kind of angry and butt hurt about it to be honest.

I am still trying to pull those truly top shelf girls and I believe I will in the future, but I have had to realize that I was going to have to develop some other things to compensate, cause there was no way I could just do it on looks alone.

Post: #31

(06-30-2017 05:14 PM)Preston Blood Wrote:  

Quote:OP serious question, do you think you're ugly? Because I have a feeling that the vast majority of guys that start these looks vs game posts think they are.

I've done ok for myself but yes to an extent.

Not exactly ugly but probably just average and I am of the variety that feels like I would do alot better if I was a better looking guy.

By average I mean my overall package, I am actually fairly high in a few regards but have a few things that can't be changed that keep me from ever being top tier in looks.

And yes to this day, I am still kind of angry and butt hurt about it to be honest.

I am still trying to pull those truly top shelf girls and I believe I will in the future, but I have had to realize that I was going to have to develop some other things to compensate, cause there was no way I could just do it on looks alone.

Get jacked. Girls will forgive short stature and an unaesthetic face if your biceps draw their attention away from both. A buddy of mine whose short and has an unaesthetic face made out with over 9 girls one night in downtown Austin, I stopped counting somewhere around then. Some of them, he made out with them in front of their boyfriends. None of them did anything about it, he was just too jacked and they didn't want to confront him. I'm not saying you should do that, but if you weren't blessed in the looks department, you can definitely move your SMV several points higher by getting jacked. Go for size, getting ripped is more suited for folks with aesthetic faces.

I'll admit that if I was ugly, I'd probably be on roids right now. There's no way I'd allow myself to go through life with a low SMV if I knew I could do something about it, hell no.

Post: #32

^ this is exactly the reason I'm trying to get my hands on some roids. I'm willing to do unorthodox shit to get my smv higher.

Post: #33

After reading a ton of threads on this forum, I've observed that everyone here has a different definition of "game." Of course each definition of "game" has something to do with getting laid, but each definition is different enough that everyone ends up talking past each other in threads like this one.

It's not too difficult to figure out each individual's definition from the context in his posts, but no one seems to do that. Instead, everyone just (implicitly) puts forth his own definition instead and uses it as the starting point of his answer.

The looks vs. game question will probably continue to be asked and not sufficiently answered until everyone can agree on what "game" means.

Post: #34

(07-04-2017 02:10 AM)Corollary Wrote:  After reading a ton of threads on this forum, I've observed that everyone here has a different definition of "game." Of course each definition of "game" has something to do with getting laid, but each definition is different enough that everyone ends up talking past each other in threads like this one.

It's not too difficult to figure out each individual's definition from the context in his posts, but no one seems to do that. Instead, everyone just (implicitly) puts forth his own definition instead and uses it as the starting point of his answer.

The looks vs. game question will probably continue to be asked and not sufficiently answered until everyone can agree on what "game" means.

It's actually not complex for me.

Looks, game in that order.

If you analyze it logically, you'll find this to be true. Typically guys in the "looks don't matter" camp aren't looking at it objectively and have too much emotional attachment to the game aspect of attraction.

With that said, I also know about the potential of game to override disadvantages in looks so I'm not saying guys should focus on looks exclusively. A logical self-analysis will reveal to you what you should focus on next to improve.

Post: #35

(07-05-2017 12:21 AM)dknightbro Wrote:  

(07-04-2017 02:10 AM)Corollary Wrote:  After reading a ton of threads on this forum, I've observed that everyone here has a different definition of "game." Of course each definition of "game" has something to do with getting laid, but each definition is different enough that everyone ends up talking past each other in threads like this one.

It's not too difficult to figure out each individual's definition from the context in his posts, but no one seems to do that. Instead, everyone just (implicitly) puts forth his own definition instead and uses it as the starting point of his answer.

The looks vs. game question will probably continue to be asked and not sufficiently answered until everyone can agree on what "game" means.

It's actually not complex for me.

Looks, game in that order.

If you analyze it logically, you'll find this to be true. Typically guys in the "looks don't matter" camp aren't looking at it objectively and have too much emotional attachment to the game aspect of attraction.

With that said, I also know about the potential of game to override disadvantages in looks so I'm not saying guys should focus on looks exclusively. A logical self-analysis will reveal to you what you should focus on next to improve.

You quoted me without offering your definition of game. So what do you think game is?

I suspect your definition of game will lead anyone to the conclusion that looks > game, but what if someone had a different definition than you do?

Post: #36

Game is simply a series of thought processes & actions that leads you towards sex with women on the higher end of the attraction spectrum (typically) without outright paying for it.

Whether you close or not depends on how effective your thought processes + actions are.

Why looks matter is it will affect your game on all levels. All factors being the same, you simply have to put in more effort in game with lesser looks.

However, looks is not enough to close the deal. Logistics I would argue would be the 1st factor in game. Being a stud in the middle of nowhere is not gonna help your results.

Post: #37

Too many views colliding, really need to sort things.

Game vs look will be sterily debated each time some insecure member will try to get response forcing his point of view: "How can I get girls if I'm not good-loooking/rich/extrovert..."

Qualities like Look(Build, Style), Wealth, Game(Rhetoric), Overconfidence, Charisma are all you want to have to be able to bed women, but not having in one won't affect your charm if you compensate with others.

Kind of like this:


My point is Game does not mean the same for each one of us due to the multiples goals met on RVF with women, so don't expect a definition according to everyone.

Post: #38

I guess it's a lot like the many questions asked on Seddit -Usually along the lines of:

''If a girl thinks i'm physically unnatractive, what do I need to do in terms of 'game' to make her want to sleep with me?!''

And that's probably why people bring up the definition of 'game'. I mean, in terms of 'tangible' things related to game, I guess we're talking about

teasing
DHV'ing,
using humour,
physically escalating.
Challenging her

But then, do we really think that them things will make a girl who thinks you're unnatractive want to sleep with you? I dunno. Would teasing not just put you in the 'he's fun, but I only see him as a friend' camp? And then would physically escalating not be met with ''Oh! Shit, sorry. I didn't realise I was giving you them signals. I'm not interested in you like that'

I tend to go with the Mark Manson philosophy. 'Game' is unfortunately not some black magic, but behaving in a certain way (game) will help turn the MAYBE girls into YES girls

Post: #39

(06-30-2017 05:42 PM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

(06-30-2017 05:14 PM)Preston Blood Wrote:  

Quote:OP serious question, do you think you're ugly? Because I have a feeling that the vast majority of guys that start these looks vs game posts think they are.

I've done ok for myself but yes to an extent.

Not exactly ugly but probably just average and I am of the variety that feels like I would do alot better if I was a better looking guy.

By average I mean my overall package, I am actually fairly high in a few regards but have a few things that can't be changed that keep me from ever being top tier in looks.

And yes to this day, I am still kind of angry and butt hurt about it to be honest.

I am still trying to pull those truly top shelf girls and I believe I will in the future, but I have had to realize that I was going to have to develop some other things to compensate, cause there was no way I could just do it on looks alone.

Get jacked. Girls will forgive short stature and an unaesthetic face if your biceps draw their attention away from both. A buddy of mine whose short and has an unaesthetic face made out with over 9 girls one night in downtown Austin, I stopped counting somewhere around then. Some of them, he made out with them in front of their boyfriends. None of them did anything about it, he was just too jacked and they didn't want to confront him. I'm not saying you should do that, but if you weren't blessed in the looks department, you can definitely move your SMV several points higher by getting jacked. Go for size, getting ripped is more suited for folks with aesthetic faces.

I'll admit that if I was ugly, I'd probably be on roids right now. There's no way I'd allow myself to go through life with a low SMV if I knew I could do something about it, hell no.

This happened.

Post: #40

(07-06-2017 02:58 AM)ComebackKid Wrote:  

(06-30-2017 05:42 PM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

(06-30-2017 05:14 PM)Preston Blood Wrote:  

Quote:OP serious question, do you think you're ugly? Because I have a feeling that the vast majority of guys that start these looks vs game posts think they are.

I've done ok for myself but yes to an extent.

Not exactly ugly but probably just average and I am of the variety that feels like I would do alot better if I was a better looking guy.

By average I mean my overall package, I am actually fairly high in a few regards but have a few things that can't be changed that keep me from ever being top tier in looks.

And yes to this day, I am still kind of angry and butt hurt about it to be honest.

I am still trying to pull those truly top shelf girls and I believe I will in the future, but I have had to realize that I was going to have to develop some other things to compensate, cause there was no way I could just do it on looks alone.

Get jacked. Girls will forgive short stature and an unaesthetic face if your biceps draw their attention away from both. A buddy of mine whose short and has an unaesthetic face made out with over 9 girls one night in downtown Austin, I stopped counting somewhere around then. Some of them, he made out with them in front of their boyfriends. None of them did anything about it, he was just too jacked and they didn't want to confront him. I'm not saying you should do that, but if you weren't blessed in the looks department, you can definitely move your SMV several points higher by getting jacked. Go for size, getting ripped is more suited for folks with aesthetic faces.

I'll admit that if I was ugly, I'd probably be on roids right now. There's no way I'd allow myself to go through life with a low SMV if I knew I could do something about it, hell no.

This happened.

I wish there was a magic way to know when someone online is telling the truth or not.

Last night, someone told me a story about someone they know that was an awkward virgin in his late 20's. Hopped on steroids, and banged lke 40 hot girls within a year. Apparently it was more to do with the effects on his brain rather than his body that helped him acchieve this

Since reading that, i've been looking into testosterone suppliers and am considering running a cycle for a few months.

I really need to get laid again within the next few years and it seems like a very low risk in all ways. It's not even illegal to buy here in the UK

Post: #41

(07-06-2017 03:17 AM)subterfuge Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 02:58 AM)ComebackKid Wrote:  

(06-30-2017 05:42 PM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

(06-30-2017 05:14 PM)Preston Blood Wrote:  

Quote:OP serious question, do you think you're ugly? Because I have a feeling that the vast majority of guys that start these looks vs game posts think they are.

I've done ok for myself but yes to an extent.

Not exactly ugly but probably just average and I am of the variety that feels like I would do alot better if I was a better looking guy.

By average I mean my overall package, I am actually fairly high in a few regards but have a few things that can't be changed that keep me from ever being top tier in looks.

And yes to this day, I am still kind of angry and butt hurt about it to be honest.

I am still trying to pull those truly top shelf girls and I believe I will in the future, but I have had to realize that I was going to have to develop some other things to compensate, cause there was no way I could just do it on looks alone.

Get jacked. Girls will forgive short stature and an unaesthetic face if your biceps draw their attention away from both. A buddy of mine whose short and has an unaesthetic face made out with over 9 girls one night in downtown Austin, I stopped counting somewhere around then. Some of them, he made out with them in front of their boyfriends. None of them did anything about it, he was just too jacked and they didn't want to confront him. I'm not saying you should do that, but if you weren't blessed in the looks department, you can definitely move your SMV several points higher by getting jacked. Go for size, getting ripped is more suited for folks with aesthetic faces.

I'll admit that if I was ugly, I'd probably be on roids right now. There's no way I'd allow myself to go through life with a low SMV if I knew I could do something about it, hell no.

This happened.

I wish there was a magic way to know when someone online is telling the truth or not.

Last night, someone told me a story about someone they know that was an awkward virgin in his late 20's. Hopped on steroids, and banged lke 40 hot girls within a year. Apparently it was more to do with the effects on his brain rather than his body that helped him acchieve this

Since reading that, i've been looking into testosterone suppliers and am considering running a cycle for a few months.

I really need to get laid again within the next few years and it seems like a very low risk in all ways. It's not even illegal to buy here in the UK

Don't do a cycle bud, either stay on or stay off. It's the most healthy and cost/benefit is way way higher.

But first, do you even lift ? Because if you don't there is a lot you can do naturally, and you should, otherwise you're just spending Money and taking steroids to look like anyone whos been 2-3+years natural lifter.

Post: #42

I think game is way overblown in my current perception.

At least in the context of how you interact with individual women.

I have a completely different perspective and view on game than the conventional definition as I understand it at least.

I think there is actually such a thing as game it's just way different than than alot of what seems to be typically discussed.

Alot of this game stuff seems really soft to me.

What I mean by that is that it's out of touch with your strength and masculinity and definition as a man.

It's just like saying some silly things or faking a certain behavior or having a certain body language or speaking loudly or something.

To me real game is related to your level and quality as a man.

And has been since the dawn of time, since that is what defines a man, which is his ability accomplish and conquer and win in life in general, not some story he told or the kind of eye contact he made or something, all that stuff is largely useless as far as humanity is concerned.

From there it's a short gap to close, if even needed at all, to have positive attention and close it.

It's like dominance except not in a one on one sense with you and a single girl, it's more like you and the rest of the collective social group of humanity and also the world.

I see game as a overall value rather than a specific one on one behavioral thing.

I think you still need interactional ability and I'm just saying that outside process is the biggest thing and that interactional ability is just the final push.

I also see game as being more female centered and weak actually, the opposite of masculinity. Because it's more like you trying to gain from a woman rather than a woman gaining from you, which I believe is the inversion of the natural order.

It's like the female leading.

In my view we are basically evolved monkeys, but still ape like. And females are designed to flock to the big dominant successful ape who is accomplishing the most for the entire group and bringing prosperity through the force of his behavior.

Women aren't designed to be that ape either, or compete with him, or share equally in the competition. They don't have that aggression, spirit, ferocity, or drive.

They are designed instead to submit to that individual and flock to him and reward him with intense sexual attraction and affection.

But I see that as based around your strength as a man, not some "game" techniques.

Although society is slightly more civil today, "game" is not actually a truly useful trait in real life outside of the kind of world we live in today and even then it's questionable because women still operate on the same wiring even though we have the law and order now.

What I mean is, in the past, your "game" would have meant nothing. A stronger guy and his crew would have just beaten the crap out of you or something. They wouldn't have just tried to "out game" you.

Or a stronger ape would have had more balls and taken bigger risks, and procured and controlled greater resources which females would have flocked to.

And things like that then might lead to other apes to follow him since they benefit from his leadership, which would then only magnify his dominance.

Such as the classic example of a bunch of apes and they are starving, so some ape with the biggest balls goes and knocks down a bee hive and gets a bunch of bee stings but escapes with a huge store of honey for the group.

Now you might say well that is not how it is in civilized society, but I think it's still the same actually, even if the rules and dynamics have changed some.

For example take any social scene. There is probably some dominant guy there, wheter it is through or force or by something else, such as superior personality and creative talent or whatever. Think say a EDM DJ.

That guy in a way is like the bee hive slaying ape of the old times and he gets hot girls and runs the scene.

To me that is game, not say going up to some girl at that DJ's EDM show and trying to say some cool things to her. What do you really have to offer her? You might have words but that guy has way more value.

I think looks matter alot too as well.

Looks seem to be even more especially important at the lower levels of money, dominance, and status, IE when you are just a dude with a job, maybe a few buddies or friends, and just a fairly regular person without any sort of power or influence.

That's also why I said Distant Light was not really running "conventional" game since if you read his posts you will realize that he doesn't even really hit on girls he has a certain kind of value and lifestyle within a niche and then they mostly come to him and chase him.

Quote:''If a girl thinks i'm physically unnatractive, what do I need to do in terms of 'game' to make her want to sleep with me?!''

I'm not sure you can. Especially if the girl is pretty hot, you'd have to be a certain type of guy, and if you are not that guy, I'm not sure there is anything you could do within reason to change her mind.

Post: #43

[/quote]

I wish there was a magic way to know when someone online is telling the truth or not.

Last night, someone told me a story about someone they know that was an awkward virgin in his late 20's. Hopped on steroids, and banged lke 40 hot girls within a year. Apparently it was more to do with the effects on his brain rather than his body that helped him acchieve this

Since reading that, i've been looking into testosterone suppliers and am considering running a cycle for a few months.

I really need to get laid again within the next few years and it seems like a very low risk in all ways. It's not even illegal to buy here in the UK
[/quote]

This is me currently. I just placed an order on testosterone ( mainly cause it was on sale) but will not use it immediately.

If the only thing I get from it is a mindset change like that guy in your story, it will be worth it for me.

Post: #44

@Preston
Game is how you "act/talk to seduce" women, You think about it too much, most of what you wrote there is True to game denialists.
If you want to game women with your highly intellectual lecture then Go on but did you do something to change your view about women and Game instead of thinking and writing long essay about what it should be ?!
Do you even lift, if yes did you notice a subtle change in how women look at you on a daily basis, do you talk to them, do you compliment them, do you dress better, do you state your interest ?

Now Just to add some science to the discussion for what your wrote:
Albert Mehrabian (psychologist) highlighted what he calls the principle of coherence in one of the most complete studies never realized on communication.
According to him, the credibility depends on the coherence between the transmitted message and the messenger himself.
55 % of our interest is going to concern to the visual component, 38 % on the sound component and 7 % only on the used vocabulary.
But the visual component does not focus on the physical appearance, and this whatever is the sex of the observed subject.
It's based on the coherence between the attitude, the body movements and the message delivered.
Source

So if it's coherent with you not believing in this bullshit called Game then own it fully and stop disserting about it.

Roosh wrote an article:

Quote:8 Signs You’re A Game Denialist
February 1, 2012

1. You follow over a dozen PUAs on the internet. You know the entire product line of each, but you publically claim that all are scam artist liars. When someone posts a pirate link to one of their new 12 DVD sets, you quietly download it.

2. You are obsessed with looks. When a man claims success with women, you attribute 100% of that success to his appearance. In your world view, a good-looking guy who is deaf, blind, and mute would still get laid a lot.

3. You are obsessed with money. You think you need to be rich to get a 7, yet you spend your free time playing video games posting on hate forums instead of increasing the income that you think is so important to sexual success.

4. You offer no solutions. If you do, they’ll either be an abbreviated version of existing game advice or be just flat-out retarded. One prominent game denialist said the secret to getting laid is to take a shower and then go out and completely ignore women (he wasn’t joking). Instead of pursuing a path of self-improvement, you complain endlessly like an elderly woman.

5. Your mother had power over your dad. You’re trained to believe that only women can be empowered, not men. The best thing a guy can do is to accept that he sucks with women and get a 9-5 job to enjoy the occasional Chipotle meal with a side of guacamole.

6. You find it hard to believe that women want to have sex just for the sake of having sex. You think heavenly bodies need to be aligned for a girl to have a one-night stand or put out quickly, that she needs to go through a 100 bullet point checklist just to open her legs. I’ve seen haters who claim that one-night stands “don’t exist” and are “impossible.”

7. You believe in the myth of the good girl. You think that all the girls having sex are sluts. You think that an “honest” girl guards her pussy like a medieval sentry and only puts out for rich and good-looking guys who invest one year doing Compliment and Cuddle groundwork. You think playing the numbers game is “wrong” because it just selects for girls who want to have sex, when the entire point of game is to have sex with girls who want to have sex.

8. You have society anxiety disorder. The amount of unresolved fear has built up in you for so long that it is no longer curable by modern psychiatry. Therefore, you’re most likely a 20-something virgin. The world is a dangerous place, and those who have successfully met that danger head-on are obviously con artists or liars.

Sadly, if all game denialists died right now, neither men or women would mourn them. They provide value for neither.

Post: #45

I agree with blck and was thinking along the same lines.

I was going to respond and say that not only does preston not have game, but doesn't understand what game is.

In my mind and my reality, Game is everything... and looks/ even resources are negligible. You can optimize your looks with clothes, scents, style, attitude etc.. Because let's say you lose all resources. game aka uncommon knowledge is still there, in the mind, body and spirit. Money comes and goes, looks and health fade, but game is eternal.

And uncommon knowledge it truly truly is. it's why there are forums dedicated to the topic plus countless informations, yet a great majority of persons, virtual and real, in this space do not understand what game even is

Furthermore, game for the purposes of gaining sexual favor witha woman is really small-scaling it, game goes beyond sex. beyond.

Besides, prestons post is, in summary, defeatist, which takes the fun out of everything. At the end, he's just like, fuck it. You know? Fuck it. No. Game is the one thing in life I can rely on. No qualifications necessary

Back in the day, just look at the "court" in Italy and courtiers. It was nothing but game.

And part of game is positioning as well, so if you gotta put yourself around the girls you want, or the situation you want, then how is that not game. Being a man is the foundation and it's NoT a charade of tactics and strategies with no foundation.

In the end, the reason they say game is sold not told is because no matter how much people in the know talk about it, it's gonna go over peoples heads who aren't ready for it.

Preston wake up man. Ya know. Figure out what it is you want and get after it. Come on. I feel like even if there wasn't a pua book ever written, a guy could figure it out for himself in trial and error...

Even if you wanna bang model looking broads, like, go hang out where the models are at and youre gonna fall into some pussy eventually come on man.
For the people with "super high standards"... figure it out.

Post: #46

(06-22-2017 07:23 PM)Preston Blood Wrote:  

Quote:Welcome aboard !

Thanks.

Quote:They're very important indeed, in my experience. Not to say that one can't get laid and still be on the ugly side, but good looks make things infinitely easier.

And I tend to agree with your observations ; I always thought of it like ''' 'Game' is what you use to close the deal with girls that are already attracted to you''

I think you can be very handsome and struggle to get laid if you have absolutely zero game. So that alone shows that game exists.

But if a girl looks at you and thinks ''Uggghh....he's not my type at all! I like tall guys with nice cheekbones. He's ugly'' then all of the 'game' in the world won't make her attracted

I understand how to get girls in the context of they are already open to me.

I just don't really understand it in the context of there is no interest and you use "game" to create it like magic. I am not saying it couldn't exist, just something I really know nothing of to be honest.

I only get it in the context of managing and closing on existing interest.

Usually if a girl closes off to me then it's finished in my mind and I leave it at that. And in fact I feel like doing anything other than that is actually making your position even worse.

I just get it in terms of she is open to me and then I push and close off that.

I'm not sure any of the posted threads actually answered my question either. They were kind of vague, so even though the topic has been done to death apparently, I still am not really seeing a clear explanation of what "game" is precisely in the context of a ugly or even average man with no natural interest.

Only like girls that like you. why chase after someone that doesn't like you? But first of all you have to LOVE yourself. Like be in love with yourself.

if you're going after a girl that don't like you, make a triangle play. Create a triangle of jealousy with someone that's close to your target. It's human nature and if you love yourself then they're gonna be attracted to you after the triangle play.

But if you love yourself you wouldn't bother with someone who doesn't like you aka doesn't respect your value yet. THey all come around eventually.

But youre not gonna give a fuck if you love yourself so you gotta start there.

Game is uncommon knowledge. It's an attitude, a belief system, a way of living.
It is kind of vague. It's uncommon. Mysterious.

"I still am not really seeing a clear explanation of what "game" is precisely in the context of a ugly or even average man with no natural interest." There is no explanation for you because you can't fabricate interest if you beleive you have no natural interest whatever that means. You need some self esteem. Even if you have no self esteem you are worthy enough for a steak dinner right and some mac and cheese and a glass of merlot. SO you are also worthy of a simple piece of pussy, sirr

Post: #47

I feel like I am actually thinking about it less and making it way more simple.

I can clearly define what game is from my perspective and also how my definition translates into a clear action process that would lead to a given result.

Blck, with the things (links) you have posted, I am struggling to relate it to a clear action process. I'm not even sure what the advice or the game even is actually. It just sounds like a lot of vague feel good macho talk.

It seems like more about the player image and appearance than about the plain and simple how to's.

It's more like mindset than straight forward actions and instructions.

Quote:Do you even lift, if yes did you notice a subtle change in how women look at you on a daily basis, do you talk to them, do you compliment them, do you dress better, do you state your interest ?

I wouldn't really call that game, I'd just call it maximizing your value and then running a numbers game. Although that's pretty practical and straight forward.

Quote:Game is how you "act/talk to seduce" women

I can understand that this is something that you would develop over a long period of time of both reading information and experience that might be unreasonable to ask you to explain clearly in a few small posts and that even if you couldn't do it you might still understand it outside of it.

But I still think stuff like this is just too vague especially for an inexperienced person, to really understand. It's like telling someone who wants to learn to shoot a gun to "imagine you are Clint Eastwood". Instead of actually teaching them the skill and technique and action of shooting.

Quote:You offer no solutions

I don't want to say I am offering a solution because I am not a teacher or anything nor am I trying to be, but I am offering my current method and perspective.

So I am not just being critical without an alternative view point. That was the point of my thread, if game is what is more important or if other things are that are non game related.

Quote:You find it hard to believe that women want to have sex just for the sake of having sex.

I don't think that women don't enjoy sex, but I do think that dick is very abundant and low value as a stand alone.

I think women enjoy sex alot but as a component of an overall value.

Who do you think would get laid more, a rock star or a cold approaching pua screening for sex? And why?

Quote:You believe in the myth of the good girl. You think that all the girls having sex are sluts. You think that an “honest” girl guards her pussy like a medieval sentry and only puts out for rich and good-looking guys who invest one year doing Compliment and Cuddle groundwork. You think playing the numbers game is “wrong” because it just selects for girls who want to have sex, when the entire point of game is to have sex with girls who want to have sex.

I do not have this opinion and did not express it.

Quote:Sadly, if all game denialists died right now, neither men or women would mourn them. They provide value for neither.

That was part of what I was saying in my last post though. That "game" isn't real value. Or at best it's just one element of it. Why would you think that the only value a guy can provide is "game"?

Quote:Besides, prestons post is, in summary, defeatist, which takes the fun out of everything.

Well that was not my intention.

I was actually trying to do the opposite, ask what works and what does not. So that you can succeed.

For example watch this video:





I am not saying this is what you mean personally by game, but in my mind this guy has low value. Is it defeatist for him to try to do something more effective, or to keep putting tons of effort into something that is simply not working 99% of the time?

In my opinion even if he succeeded on very rare occasions, the guy in this video for example, is just wasting his time. His effort : reward ratio is terrible.

Quote:I was going to respond and say that not only does preston not have game, but doesn't understand what game is.

Well what is game then.

Quote:Game is uncommon knowledge. It's an attitude, a belief system, a way of living.

It is kind of vague. It's uncommon. Mysterious.

That could be true, but it wouldn't really matter or help someone who didn't understand it in the first place.

Quote:You need some self esteem.

I am not sure if I feel like self esteem is necessarily the key. I have seen people with low self esteem do well and people with high ones do bad and vice versa.

I think loving yourself could be helpful to your life, but just like I was saying with blck, it's another one of those intangible things, that really isn't a clear process that's easy to connect action to results.

Post: #48

At first you wanted to debate Looks vs Game, then try to understand what actually is Game now you want a process, so:
-Approach women(100 at least)
-Find out what kind of topics get their attention
-Have genuine (internal) fun talking with them and showing your true self
-Try to get the bang as soon as possible if logistics allows it if not try to schedule another meeting

Once you've done this, you'll get it...

(07-06-2017 10:41 PM)LINUX Wrote:  The answer is no.

Approaching 1,000 women will not teach you game.

You'll get laid more, sure, but that's based on statistics and putting yourself out there.

True game doesn't happen at a conversational level.

As it was put in law 4 of 48 laws of Power:

Quote:The More You Say, The More Common You Appear

True game will take you five years of busting your ass in the gym, eating, studying human behavior, not giving a fuck, and developing yourself into something that cannot be broken. When you finally get there, you'll know it. You'll feel it when you walk down the street and you'll see how easy it is to fuck a woman, without even speaking a word to her.

That's my last contribution but I'm sure you'll find something to say on what has been posted instead of going try it

Post: #49

Any definition of game that doesn't involve the end point being sex (or at least some sort of sexual activity) and a complete focus on methods that will expedite that process is self-masturbation.

Let's not kid ourselves, if you consider game just interacting with females without sexual activity you might as well just be doing an enhanced version of friend zone.