Post: #26

(09-21-2011 01:15 PM)Gmac Wrote:  

(09-21-2011 12:59 PM)Riker Wrote:  

(09-18-2011 06:26 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  Are there any quality examples of real day game on you tube? I seem to remember a thread on here that may have had a few but can't find it.

I love these guys. You can hate on them for things if you want, but I love their style and find them hilarious.

I love how the guy calls campus security at the end. Those are funny, as I'm sure it's done for comedic value, but I guarantee you their number to bang conversion rate is close to nil with that strategy.

what a faggot. seriously what grown man hates on a young guy talking to girls like that? these approach videos are boring and wont teach you shit IMO.

Post: #27

(09-21-2011 07:29 PM)Roosh Wrote:  I really like the Simple Pickup guys and admire what they're doing, but their videos are getting repetitive? I find myself skipping around more instead of watching. They should try different cities or maybe even night game.

They recently hit up NYC......

Post: #28

I think the Simple Pickup Guys are just taking advantage of the fact that they can look like a player, without actually being a player, and get lots of noteriety for it.

Their fame from being ABC will get them far more poon than their silly antics.

Post: #29

I want to hear your opinion (especially Roosh) on the Paul Janka method of just approaching women in droves without trying to use quality game and get as many phone numbers as you can in 5 minute interactions, then text like 10 of them at a time until you get 1 who wants to bang you. Could that work with a guy who is average looking?

Post: #30

(12-04-2011 06:21 PM)rz62 Wrote:  I want to hear your opinion (especially Roosh) on the Paul Janka method of just approaching women in droves without trying to use quality game and get as many phone numbers as you can in 5 minute interactions, then text like 10 of them at a time until you get 1 who wants to bang you. Could that work with a guy who is average looking?

Why don't you try it and see for yourself?

Post: #31

(09-18-2011 06:59 PM)Gmac Wrote:  Real Day game (i.e. conversation) isn't all that exciting... that's why there aren't really any examples out there. Talk to a girl like a normal person and get her number... who wants to watch that?

word.

first vid is super fake. I've approached countless women on the street and shit never went like that.

some of these dudes are getting numbers, but they look mad gay. I'm not sensing any sexual charge to these interactions. maybe I just have a different style...

in my experience if there's no sexual charge, that numbers gonna flake.

Post: #32

(12-04-2011 06:21 PM)rz62 Wrote:  I want to hear your opinion (especially Roosh) on the Paul Janka method of just approaching women in droves without trying to use quality game and get as many phone numbers as you can in 5 minute interactions, then text like 10 of them at a time until you get 1 who wants to bang you. Could that work with a guy who is average looking?

The higher the numbers, the greater probability you have of scoring. I'd say that for every bang I've gotten this year, I've probably only kissed closed twice as many or more. For every one bang, I can't even count the number of girls that I've tried to game.

This has been my first year of being conscious of game and pro-actively trying to get better. I've gotten more pussy this year than previous years, and am convinced that getting better at game makes a huge difference, but you have to put in the time and get the numbers up. Like another job.

I don't think I have good game, but I'm fucking persistent and believe that I'm getting better. Ideally, I think we'd all like to have a 1:1 approach to bang ratio (or more - having them approach you), but it probably takes a lot of practice to get close. I've sort of failed my way up to 16-17 in this year, and if notch count means more than approach/bang ratio, I'm winning.

Post: #33

(12-04-2011 10:25 PM)soup Wrote:  

(12-04-2011 06:21 PM)rz62 Wrote:  I want to hear your opinion (especially Roosh) on the Paul Janka method of just approaching women in droves without trying to use quality game and get as many phone numbers as you can in 5 minute interactions, then text like 10 of them at a time until you get 1 who wants to bang you. Could that work with a guy who is average looking?

The higher the numbers, the greater probability you have of scoring. I'd say that for every bang I've gotten this year, I've probably only kissed closed twice as many or more. For every one bang, I can't even count the number of girls that I've tried to game.

This has been my first year of being conscious of game and pro-actively trying to get better. I've gotten more pussy this year than previous years, and am convinced that getting better at game makes a huge difference, but you have to put in the time and get the numbers up. Like another job.

I don't think I have good game, but I'm fucking persistent and believe that I'm getting better. Ideally, I think we'd all like to have a 1:1 approach to bang ratio (or more - having them approach you), but it probably takes a lot of practice to get close. I've sort of failed my way up to 16-17 in this year, and if notch count means more than approach/bang ratio, I'm winning.

whats your nightgame/daygame bang ratio, soup?

Post: #34

My experience has been club/bar game and online far outweighing day, but I'm working to change that. I've gotten SNLs by picking up girls on the street, but this was at night. I've gotten numbers in the day, but most have turned flake.

Also some lays via social circle.

I'm still reading, and have been trying out Roosh's Daybang book, which btw has been helping me with online and night game, but I need to make more of an effort at dedicated practice (like blocking out a few hours exclusively for day game).

Post: #35

I really like the SimplePickup guys. I think they've optimized the best strategy for hitting on girls of the facebook generation (18-26 y.o.)

That said, I'm seeing in all of these daygame vids that the guys all open with a comment on how they find the girl physically attractive. I tried this the other night and found I was getting many more enthused responses from girls than when I approached indirectly. Maybe it's a new era.

Post: #36

I'm not a fan of telling girls how good they look unless I'm about to stick my dick in them. I stopped doing it when I found this forum and a few people recommended not telling her that. It makes sense because 99% of guys will keep on filling her head up while you never mention it and make her go hmmmm.

Post: #37

(12-04-2011 06:21 PM)soup Wrote:  I don't think I have good game, but I'm fucking persistent and believe that I'm getting better. Ideally, I think we'd all like to have a 1:1 approach to bang ratio (or more - having them approach you), but it probably takes a lot of practice to get close. I've sort of failed my way up to 16-17 in this year, and if notch count means more than approach/bang ratio, I'm winning.

You're winning. Nobody knows of your batting average except you. Home runs count. Congrats.

Post: #38

Yeah, I notice there seems to be this hang-up between the older guys and the younger dudes I'm watching on Youtube.

Post: #39

I'm a really big fan of the simple pick up guys, I find their videos really entertaining and they have a good vibe. Much more enjoyable than watching a lot of other day game vids that I just find plain cringe to watch. I like watching a few of their vids before going out or going on a date, puts me in a really socialble/playful mood.

Post: #40

(12-04-2011 07:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(12-04-2011 06:21 PM)rz62 Wrote:  I want to hear your opinion (especially Roosh) on the Paul Janka method of just approaching women in droves without trying to use quality game and get as many phone numbers as you can in 5 minute interactions, then text like 10 of them at a time until you get 1 who wants to bang you. Could that work with a guy who is average looking?

Why don't you try it and see for yourself?

I don't have time to run that kind of game for a big enough sample size if it wouldn't work on an average guy. I want to know so that I don't waste a year in the game doing a method that only works for good looking guys.

I just want to know if mass approach without focusing on tight game the way Janka does it is effective for daytime.

Post: #41

Janka's game is pretty tight though. He leaves very little room for error, which is the beauty of his method.

But yes, he's an attractive dude, which helps him, but shouldn't matter to you. Doing the same exact method, you'd probably have a lower close rate, but it's not like his game is magic to the point that average-looking guys wouldn't be successful doing the same thing.

The huge caveat though, is he lives in NYC, which is about as target-rich as anywhere. Probably wouldn't be the best method in Smalltown, USA.

Post: #42

(12-05-2011 06:26 PM)PDX Wrote:  Janka's game is pretty tight though. He leaves very little room for error, which is the beauty of his method.

But yes, he's an attractive dude, which helps him, but shouldn't matter to you. Doing the same exact method, you'd probably have a lower close rate, but it's not like his game is magic to the point that average-looking guys wouldn't be successful doing the same thing.

The huge caveat though, is he lives in NYC, which is about as target-rich as anywhere. Probably wouldn't be the best method in Smalltown, USA.

I'm always hearing about how good looking Janka is, as if that gives him an unfair advantage. He's in good shape, dresses well, and has a good haircut. Anyone can do that. If you're in bad shape that's on you.

I've had students that were seriously ugly who did just as good as any goodlooking dude. I'm sick of guys talking about "does this only work for goodlooking guys." Man the fuck up.

Btw NYC is the easiest place to approach women in the US I've ever been to - there are more young single women than men. If you have balls and you bring positive energy you can have more women than you'll know what to do with out there.

Post: #43

(12-05-2011 11:26 PM)Iceinthewater Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 06:26 PM)PDX Wrote:  Janka's game is pretty tight though. He leaves very little room for error, which is the beauty of his method.

But yes, he's an attractive dude, which helps him, but shouldn't matter to you. Doing the same exact method, you'd probably have a lower close rate, but it's not like his game is magic to the point that average-looking guys wouldn't be successful doing the same thing.

The huge caveat though, is he lives in NYC, which is about as target-rich as anywhere. Probably wouldn't be the best method in Smalltown, USA.

I'm always hearing about how good looking Janka is, as if that gives him an unfair advantage. He's in good shape, dresses well, and has a good haircut. Anyone can do that. If you're in bad shape that's on you.

I've had students that were seriously ugly who did just as good as any goodlooking dude. I'm sick of guys talking about "does this only work for goodlooking guys." Man the fuck up.

Btw NYC is the easiest place to approach women in the US I've ever been to - there are more young single women than men. If you have balls and you bring positive energy you can have more women than you'll know what to do with out there.

you game in NYC? I'd be down to day game in NYC and I'm like a 45 minute train ride.. I think it'd be great if I had someone to day sarge with lol.

Post: #44

(12-06-2011 12:25 AM)drymarro Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 11:26 PM)Iceinthewater Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 06:26 PM)PDX Wrote:  Janka's game is pretty tight though. He leaves very little room for error, which is the beauty of his method.

But yes, he's an attractive dude, which helps him, but shouldn't matter to you. Doing the same exact method, you'd probably have a lower close rate, but it's not like his game is magic to the point that average-looking guys wouldn't be successful doing the same thing.

The huge caveat though, is he lives in NYC, which is about as target-rich as anywhere. Probably wouldn't be the best method in Smalltown, USA.

I'm always hearing about how good looking Janka is, as if that gives him an unfair advantage. He's in good shape, dresses well, and has a good haircut. Anyone can do that. If you're in bad shape that's on you.

I've had students that were seriously ugly who did just as good as any goodlooking dude. I'm sick of guys talking about "does this only work for goodlooking guys." Man the fuck up.

Btw NYC is the easiest place to approach women in the US I've ever been to - there are more young single women than men. If you have balls and you bring positive energy you can have more women than you'll know what to do with out there.

you game in NYC? I'd be down to day game in NYC and I'm like a 45 minute train ride.. I think it'd be great if I had someone to day sarge with lol.

I would but I'm in the midwest for a bit - living cheaper to save more money so I can travel. Probably won't be back in ny til the end of next year.

Post: #45

(12-04-2011 06:21 PM)rz62 Wrote:  I want to hear your opinion (especially Roosh) on the Paul Janka method of just approaching women in droves without trying to use quality game and get as many phone numbers as you can in 5 minute interactions, then text like 10 of them at a time until you get 1 who wants to bang you. Could that work with a guy who is average looking?

Paul Janka's game works for him. He's a 6'1" white dude that looks like a Calvin Klein model. Most white girls and Asian girls will be into him, that's why he has a 11% conversion ratio for every number he gets.

He does a glorified numbers game, and uses those things as his game. An average joe or minority will have to use actual game, since he's conversion ratio will be lower compared to that.

My 2 cents.

Post: #46

Does anyoe have the video of the white guy with the ponytail jumping up and down while approaching?

Post: #47

I've been thinking about the SimplePickup guys who seemingly "compliment" the girls right away when approaching. Upon another review, what I saw is that they don't really say that the girls are "hot." They almost always call them "adorable."

Adorable.

That's a neg in the faintest, most feather-on-the-cheek brush type of way. Anybody agree? Disagree?

Post: #48

(12-06-2011 06:46 PM)Batata Wrote:  Adorable.

That's a neg in the faintest, most feather-on-the-cheek brush type of way. Anybody agree? Disagree?

Tried and true.

Post: #49

Some good tips right here. I could have used these guys when i first started out.