Anyway, the point of Mystery Method style opens is that they are generally pattern interruptive; that is, they are designed for the girl to say, "Huh? Wha...? Oh, that's interesting!" and snap to attention, whether she is 'attracted' to the guy yet or not.
Opinion openers, magic tricks, etc., are all intriguing and interruptive.
Probably something is wrong with my delivery, and I feel it is exactly because I sometimes feel: Come on there is no way she will just start discussing your opinion opener, why would she do it with a random guy, she clearly knows you are trying to hit on her anyway.
I'm being a bit facetious here, but even very high value guys get rejected a lot, and going direct always makes the rejection feel more "personal." If you aren't steeled for it it can wear on you.
That’s a good point. I think I felt that the main reason rejections affect me is because I don’t have abundance with the girls I want yet, and when this happens I will just not care much about it.
But I suppose we are all humans and if you keep getting rejected, no matter how much you know your value it can affect you.
There is also the consideration if you are consistently coming in super high value, you will often trigger attainability problems going direct. e.g., the girl thinks, "I am not super hot or high status enough for a guy this high level to be approaching me. What, does he just want a pump and dump?" Like both of the Girl 3 and Girl 4 examples above, the rejection may well come down to "I don't think this guy is serious about liking me. I think he is just pulling my chain or out for a few pumps. To save my pride I need to reject him."
My idea was that if you reach this point of high value you won’t even care much about the girls that find you unattainable, because there are enough high value ones that you can get with anyway.
Maybe that’s off though, I can’t really say how many girls truly believe that a very high value guy is attainable to them. It could be that even if you are a super hot model you will still feel that you are not in Victoria’s Secret for example.
I guess this is absolute abundance, where every girl is truly replaceable.
But this sort of highlights a difference in goals between screening game to get laid by any girl above your hotness threshold (like any 9 who is 18 with a bubble butt)... Fungible pussy
Vs. Seducing a particular woman. Mystery has always looked for girlfriends (or two bisexual stripper girlfriends at once was an earlier goal). His current goal is to find his "Act Two", " Mystery and...?", a "travel partner".
It's like if the goal is to find a wife and mother of your children - way less fungible. So you could be up to your eyeballs in all the greens you could ever want, but still miss out on her.
So Mystery in most sets will do a mix of canned material and freestyling. The freestyling is material development and testing, like a comedian trying jokes on the road. But when he encounters his personal 10, then he goes 100% rehearsed material, like the comedian taping his Netflix special.
You guys are derailing my Spike thread... Into a technical Mystery discussion... Could not be happier
I guess this is absolute abundance, where every girl is truly replaceable.
But this sort of highlights a difference in goals between screening game to get laid by any girl above your hotness threshold (like any 9 who is 18 with a bubble butt)... Fungible pussy
Vs. Seducing a particular woman. Mystery has always looked for girlfriends (or two bisexual stripper girlfriends at once was an earlier goal). His current goal is to find his "Act Two", " Mystery and...?", a "travel partner".
It's like if the goal is to find a wife and mother of your children - way less fungible. So you could be up to your eyeballs in all the greens you could ever want, but still miss out on her.
So Mystery in most sets will do a mix of canned material and freestyling. The freestyling is material development and testing, like a comedian trying jokes on the road. But when he encounters his personal 10, then he goes 100% rehearsed material, like the comedian taping his Netflix special.
So Mystery in most sets will do a mix of canned material and freestyling. The freestyling is material development and testing, like a comedian trying jokes on the road. But when he encounters his personal 10, then he goes 100% rehearsed material, like the comedian taping his Netflix special.
Couldn’t you get to the point that even your 10s are truly replaceable though?
I thought the idea of absolute abundance was hinting towards that. That at least in the pick up stage, before you get into the relationship, you know that if it doesn’t work with this 10 in front of you, you can easily find another.
And then in the relationship you know that if she misbehaves you can always replace her. Maybe it’s not practical to be replacing your wives and girlfriends all the time, but at least you should know it is possible.
That said I can see that generally in life there are situations where you should more seriously try to bring your A game. For example if the comedian has his national television debut I expect him to prepare even more and use his best material compared to when he goes to a local comedy slam.
Can’t say how applicable this is to pick up though, because even the intention to use the best material and make it work with this girl, makes me feel that is getting you a bit needy. Unless you are really able to disassociate using your best game from desiring a particular result. So you are basically fine even if you don’t get this 10, and you simply look at what went wrong, in order to get the next one.
184K likes, 5,865 comments - king68thegreat on May 25, 2025: "Follow @king68thegreat ..Mcchicken is crazy work ⚡️#king68 #kingenergy #vlog".
www.instagram.com
To be honest since I learned about technical pickup I thought this kind of thing is something to be called out to not pollute this last bastion of pickup discussion. Kind of like LMS, neo-direct, red pill, etc. Not that it's THAT bad.
Now that you guys think I am annoying I would like to request the same exile as @Dash of Englishness
Last week I went from not being able to do direct street stops at all to asking 35 for the time... So I will update when I get more used to it and have something to report other than my stutter improving (though I have to drive out a bit to find that street volume of under 25 yr olds).
I may also get to meet Juggler, so will report back if that happens.
My idea was that if you reach this point of high value you won’t even care much about the girls that find you unattainable, because there are enough high value ones that you can get with anyway
Let’s say there are 5 girls in the entire bar that are your type. 2 of them aren’t attracted to you. 1 thinks your unattainable. And the other 2 think you’re hot. You see the IOI coming from both those girls and get with one of them. Leave the bar and go bang a girl that is your type. What exactly was the missed opportunity?
^ the above comes down to good venue selection (enough of the girls your targeting) and maximizing your looks to appeal to the girls your targeting.
“A lot of time, the high interest girls that really like y’all, y’all don’t like em back because they’re not really on the level you think you deserve. But at the same time, you’re not really working on yourself to get to that level”
184K likes, 5,865 comments - king68thegreat on May 25, 2025: "Follow @king68thegreat ..Mcchicken is crazy work ⚡️#king68 #kingenergy #vlog".
www.instagram.com
To be honest since I learned about technical pickup I thought this kind of thing is something to be called out to not pollute this last bastion of pickup discussion. Kind of like LMS, neo-direct, red pill, etc. Not that it's THAT bad.
@KJ Francis I think you missing the point completely and I understand now why you keep attacking @Spike
From your discussions it seems like you are too ego invested in game. It is becoming your entire identity
So when someone has a completely different take or worldview than you, it becomes easy to write it off as not skill
But that’s not truth
It’s just cognitive dissonance. And it’s why you feel the need to attack
Because here's the truth. If the other guy is using a completely different framework than you and is getting results from it
Guess what? Means it fucking works
And if you are using your own framework and also getting results
Guess what? Means it also fucking works too
This bickering back and forth is childish. And it's making both of you come across as low IQ, even though I know you both want to be seen as smart thinkers
You don’t have to agree with someone else’s framework. But if they’re getting results, they’re correct no matter how much you wish they were not
And if you really want to prove them wrong, do it with lay reports using your own method. Because it's much easier to get people to agree with you through your actions because . . .
"When you argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Now get off the keyboard, go get laid and document it if you really want to win the argument
@KJ Francis I think you missing the point completely and I understand now why you keep attacking @Spike
From your discussions it seems like you are too ego invested in game. It is becoming your entire identity
So when someone has a completely different take or worldview than you, it becomes easy to write it off as not skill
But that’s not truth
It’s just cognitive dissonance. And it’s why you feel the need to attack
Because here's the truth. If the other guy is using a completely different framework than you and is getting results from it
Guess what? Means it fucking works
And if you are using your own framework and also getting results
Guess what? Means it also fucking works too
This bickering back and forth is childish. And it's making both of you come across as low IQ, even though I know you both want to be seen as smart thinkers
You don’t have to agree with someone else’s framework. But if they’re getting results, they’re correct no matter how much you wish they were not
And if you really want to prove them wrong, do it with lay reports using your own method. Because it's much easier to get people to agree with you through your actions because . . .
"When you argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Now get off the keyboard, go get laid and document it if you really want to win the argument
I get what you're saying, but I'm not criticizing Spike's framework and think most of what he says is correct. My entire point is that he only deals with the fashion and other looks parts of fundamentals (which is compatible with every framework from canned routines to physical game). So he can spot a DTF girl and escalate without having to seduce a yellow girl - ever. So I don't understand why he needs an account here. To teach us gen z fashion out of the goodness out of his heart? In that case, give the man Skilled Seducer of the Month.
I actually do not know what his framework is (or apparently he does not need one), which is why I nominated him and want to hear how he would SEDUCE.
Let’s say there are 5 girls in the entire bar that are your type. 2 of them aren’t attracted to you. 1 thinks your unattainable. And the other 2 think you’re hot. You see the IOI coming from both those girls and get with one of them. Leave the bar and go bang a girl that is your type. What exactly was the missed opportunity?
I don't know if I will ever have kids. But I want the skill to be able to approach, open, etc. in order to have the freedom of choice of a MUCH more rare, non-fungible "commodity". And I want us all to do well. I am not Ross Jeffries trying to compete for business among the gurus.
I get what you're saying, but I'm not criticizing Spike's framework and think most of what he says is correct. My entire point is that he only deals with the fashion and other looks parts of fundamentals (which is compatible with every framework from canned routines to physical game).
Because anyone with experience will tell you that just because a girl is green does not guarantee a lay
You can have a girl approach you, put her number in your phone and then when you text her it fizzles out
A girl can make it easy upfront for a guy, then midway through throw up resistance for whateva reason. The guy could also say or do something dumb to trigger resistance and he loses the lay
But if the guy is smooth the lay can look very straightforward even though, there was still skill in moving through escalation windows swiftly
I have personally seen this with my own two eyes. Seen guys fuck up lay ups. Shit I have fucked up lay ups too
I honestly don't even care about that award but sure why not? If others get value from his posts enough to make him seducer of the month why would it be a big deal?
He keeps telling you but you keep asking him to SEDUCE in your worldview. Get it?
It's kind of weird to be honest because you throw jabs at him a lot yet it seems like you secretly admire him. Just makes it seem like you are not confident in your own ability or maybe you have doubts in your own framework
Yeah fuck that noise. Save yourself before worrying about saving others
Instead of wanting everyone to do well focus more on YOU doing well. Being selfish about your own goals will actually make you more useful to others because you will be adding value on what you know works personally, not theory
I get what you're saying, but I'm not criticizing Spike's framework and think most of what he says is correct. My entire point is that he only deals with the fashion and other looks parts of fundamentals (which is compatible with every framework from canned routines to physical game). So he can spot a DTF girl and escalate without having to seduce a yellow girl - ever. So I don't understand why he needs an account here. To teach us gen z fashion out of the goodness out of his heart? In that case, give the man Skilled Seducer of the Month.
I actually do not know what his framework is (or apparently he does not need one), which is why I nominated him and want to hear how he would SEDUCE.
I don't know if I will ever have kids. But I want the skill to be able to approach, open, etc. in order to have the freedom of choice of a MUCH more rare, non-fungible "commodity". And I want us all to do well. I am not Ross Jeffries trying to compete for business among the gurus.
Kj if anyone wants in the forum i have threats on what he does and I have a post and video on my channel on bathroom pulls, he used to pull to bathrooms.. I am tempted to do a spike game full post... That way people on the forum don't go in circles... He doesn't do anything new or unique other than bathroom pulls, the way he did it is very impressive... I understand your point... I already told him a million times to stop with the posturing and make more practical posts... Thing is he now how tunnel vision pn fundamentals, i went through that stage myself and other posters like wm too, gll had a whole forum on what Spike talks about etc... I will make a spike post, on what he does... you can start here:
Guys i decided to write this post cause if you are out on the field you notice social dynamics have changed a bit, we are going back to the future, in other words things are trending back to the past from clothes (baggy clothes from 90, shorts with sneaker showing socks from 80s etc...).... So...
www.skilledseducer.com
Anyways i may do a style post with him(if i get drunk enough, but i don't drink)... The thing is all of these spike talk as you can see is polarizing, too much back and forth etc... no constructive.. i also explained in chase interview he knows all the games, his game is very niche now by choice...
P.s. give me couple of days i will put different posts together and all the arguments and posts against him...
Face/height/style contribute to the initial hook, but are not themselves necessary to hook. Other fundamentals are more important, and your words also help.
No, you’re gaming from the very first moment. You have your preopen value from what she sees: face/height/style, social proof, preselection, wealth indicators, etc. Then as you go in she continues to assess your value with the new information she has available (your words and your fundamentals). Her assessment of your value is determined by both your “passive” DHVs, and your “game.”
As soon as you enter you’re gaming – what is an opinion opener? You’re asking compliance, trying to present as much DHV as possible through fundamentals, and choosing verbals that present as little DLV as possible. The hook point isn’t some certain special moment where you start gaming, it just describes a certain point on the continuum of compliance, where the girls will invest to keep the conversation going when you offer to let it die. Don’t think about prehook game and posthook game, I see the process as entirely continuous – there are no discrete points where the rules suddenly change. One set of rules describes everything.
However you give an example to illustrate this by describing the beginning of a conversation with a girl that you’ve already got the initial hook with. Not an example of the beginning of a conversation with a girl that you FAILED to get that initial hook with. Because she wasn’t attracted to your fundamentals.
My example was not to demonstrate plowing despite lack of initial hook, rather it was to demonstrate that everything you do is to DHV, up to and past the hook point. I wrote “keep your attention by DHVing immediately after you open”, which is exactly what the example demonstrates – as soon as they are open, I launch straight into some DHV routine. Of course, the open itself should be DHV (in order to open them), whilst the “DHV routine” hopefully has inherently high-value verbals.
And it’s of course going to feel momentumless because you didn’t get that initial hook. The more you try, obviously the more uncomfortable she’s going to get.
Did you read the part where I said keep the momentum going even if she's not hooking? And get the hook ASAP before you can't keep the momentum any longer?
Yes, exactly, stack forwards and keep plowing. I wrote in the post that the plow must seem natural. It is a question of frame. Are you some weird guy who is cluelessly talking to girls who are uninterested, or can you frame it somehow else? If your plowing comes off DLV, you fail to open. If your plowing comes off DHV, they open. Obvious. What would you recommend instead? Give up and find someone else?
Sometimes the plowing itself can come off low value, right up till you say something which is interesting enough to hook them. Here the DHV of your verbals overcomes the DLV of your plow. But ideally the plowing doesn’t come off as low value at all. It’s the vibe you give off as you do so, which decides the frame behind you talking at non-engaging girls, which decides the value of the plowing itself. Then the verbals/fundamentals demonstrated also convey their own value. If it’s overall high-value, they open.
I remember sitting on a street corner, I tried to open some set, they laughed and smiled (good vibe), but kept walking. I was shouting my opening routine down the street after them (DLV for trying too hard, or DHV for confidence/not even considering girls would not stop for me? Question of frame.), but eventually I said something which hooked them and one ran back to give me an answer. Everyone knows this can happen: plowing works.
They’re not. Getting get to talk with you due to attraction right off the bat = means you got that initial hook due to your fundamentals (face, height, style). You haven’t said a word to her yet (tease, negs, dhv stories, whatever).
Hard disagree. For me, attraction is the emotion that occurs when you perceive that someone has high S&R value to you. Entirely a function of value, and value is a function of looks (and everything else.) I address this already when I stated the definitions that I use. If you don’t like my definitions that’s cool, use your own definitions, but your disagreement is at best a difference in semantics, at worst a misunderstanding of value and attraction. I think your way of looking at it is complicated and clunky – introducing distinctions between two things which are easily analysed as different expressions of the same thing. My way requires few axioms – everything is put under value.
They’re not. Getting get to talk with you due to attraction right off the bat = means you got that initial hook due to your fundamentals (face, height, style). You haven’t said a word to her yet (tease, negs, dhv stories, whatever).
Are you saying it's impossible to hook except through style/looks/face? Am I misunderstanding you, or are you suggesting that game cannot hook, only aesthetics can? Can social proof/preselection get you hooks?
Of course. The question is, if you were Leonardo DiCaprio in the 2000s, would those things have prevented her from opening to you? That is, can you overcome these things just by building more value? I don’t know the answer to this question: are there some special cases where she just will not open no matter what, or did you just not build enough value?
“sometimes people will just type type and type things someone else once wrote and not stop to really thinking about what it is they’re writing”
Everything I have written in this thread comes from my own field experience. The theoretical ideas are from my own processing of concepts I first read long ago – what I have written is my understanding of how things work, not a parroting of anyone else. There’s no need for such a derisive tone – your contribution to this board is good, as I’ve said you’ve done charity work talking about style. But style is not the be-all and end-all of attraction, and to suggest so is dangerously misinformative. Let your ideas speak for themselves; you have no need to hit down at others.
Only the field has the answer, and I’d bet that you’ve hooked girls who weren’t initially hooked by your style.
- Tryst
Anticipating August, roses' buds
Prepare to burst before the shrubs.
Pink shadows bloom so on your sunlit cheek
Which sets the swallow bird to speak:
"See how the daffodils their colours bare
Whose am'rous issue scents the air!"
Their stamens tremble in the shifting breeze,
And petal constellations draw the bees.
In a lot of what I say about theory, there’s a recurring theme of me trying to simplify as much as possible to as few axioms as possible. This is why ideas like the “hook point” lose their significance – the hook point is purely descriptive. Likewise value/attraction reduce to one, good looks are analysed only as a type of value, everything can be analysed as a compliance test, there is no ugly “3 IoIs before kiss rule” (because everything sits on the continuous scale of IoI/IoD, everything sits on the continuum of DLV to DHV, etc etc etc etc. This sort of thing is why I question the special case where it's impossible to hook no matter how much value you built - these arbitrary special cases require more axioms to justify; it's a lot simpler to say "you just didn't build enough value". We seek to take away, not to add.
This is just the same as how science and philosophy is improved – we see separate patterns and try to connect them under one law. As you do so, you see how this one law applies to things you hadn’t previously considered, and your understanding becomes more profound
Edit: Imagine you're a girl. You end up in some conversation with some guy who isn't very aesthetically pleasing, and dressed average. As the conversation goes on, you learn a ton of things about the guy: he has built a million pound company from scratch, he is well-read and speaks 5 languages. He has travelled the world. More than that, he's funny, a little cocky, and teaches you interesting things about yourself. His vibe is relaxed, comfortable, confident, and he exudes a sexuality. At first you were not attracted to him, but now that you know all these things about him, and (more importantly), you've experienced his vibe you become attracted to him. Shrug. I find that easy to imagine.
Imagine you're a girl. You end up in some conversation with some guy who isn't very aesthetically pleasing, and dressed average. As the conversation goes on, you learn a ton of things about the guy: he has built a million pound company from scratch, he is well-read and speaks 5 languages. He has travelled the world. More than that, he's funny, a little cocky, and teaches you interesting things about yourself. His vibe is relaxed, comfortable, confident, and he exudes a sexuality. At first you were not attracted to him, but now that you know all these things about him, and (more importantly), you've experienced his vibe you become attracted to him. Shrug. I find that easy to imagine
Something I want to ask about this. It is about the value this guy is presenting. Are we saying that in order for a girl to feel attracted to you, having done things like building a successful company, speaking many languages and travelling the world is something that plays a big role?
I am saying this, because I have been myself with women much more successful than me on paper, that I couldn’t probably teach much about business, languages, world travel. And I am sure a bunch of other men also have similar experiences.
At the same time I haven’t been with a lot of women much less successful than me on paper, that didn’t care about this at all. They didn’t even see it as me having something they would feel attracted to.
The one thing I understand is that the woman will more easily talk to you and take you seriously if she feels you are doing something with your life, but I can’t see this as generating attraction in itself. Many people who are successful in their field and even good looking are not sleeping with many women.
So I always felt that the on paper successes you have don’t really matter in field, unless you can actively use them somehow. For example by intelligently spending money, or by interacting with someone else in front of her in a different language. But no matter what you have done in your life, if she cannot feel it in the moment, not learn it in the moment, it doesn’t matter.
And I have a feeling that most of the things you can do in the moment to create attraction do not need you to be a millionaire world traveller speaking 5 languages.
It’s something I’m really curious about by the way, because it is important for the general life goals we are having. For example, Is it more important to go and learn 2-3 more languages if I am not really using them, or focus on learning how to run a specific seduction system effectively when my goal is to sleep with more women.
Are we saying that in order for a girl to feel attracted to you, having done things like building a successful company, speaking many languages and travelling the world is something that plays a big role?
Strictly NO. To get initial attraction, it's about the vibe you put out. This stuff does interact with the vibe, and does help when used properly, but is absolutely not necessarily. I was just trying to build a picture of a hyper-attractive guy who isn't good looking. I do want to write more at length about DHV stories and the role of "facts" about you, as opposed to things that are more felt in the vibe.
I agree with the rest of what you wrote, but I just wanted to get the response to your question down, so I'm not misinterpreted.
Something I want to ask about this. It is about the value this guy is presenting. Are we saying that in order for a girl to feel attracted to you, having done things like building a successful company, speaking many languages and travelling the world is something that plays a big role?
A guy could give all those DHVs and the girl won't give a shit. But it can also pique interest in some girls
One point I don't think is talked about enough is value is relative to the girl
For example if you talking to a goth chick and you start telling her about your companies and how much you travel it can actually cause more dissociation from her because she may not be into that stuff
But if instead you drop something about working with a popular alternative band, and also display some deeper understanding about her inner world she will hook better because now you seem like "you get it"
I am saying this, because I have been myself with women much more successful than me on paper, that I couldn’t probably teach much about business, languages, world travel. And I am sure a bunch of other men also have similar experiences.
At the same time I haven’t been with a lot of women much less successful than me on paper, that didn’t care about this at all. They didn’t even see it as me having something they would feel attracted to.
The one thing I understand is that the woman will more easily talk to you and take you seriously if she feels you are doing something with your life, but I can’t see this as generating attraction in itself. Many people who are successful in their field and even good looking are not sleeping with many women.
I have banged a lot of girls that had no real idea of what I did "with my life" really
Getting success in your life can help but it's not really necessary.
In fact I remember their was a lay I had where I was talking to the chick and her friend kept trying to cockblock. At some point in the interaction she ask me what I did for work
I was in a playful mood so I told her "I'm unemployed" which she thought would destroy my value. But my target looked at me with a smile and said "I don't care"
This is an extreme example but it worked because to that point, my target was attracted to me enough she didn't want me for my social value
So I always felt that the on paper successes you have don’t really matter in field, unless you can actively use them somehow. For example by intelligently spending money, or by interacting with someone else in front of her in a different language. But no matter what you have done in your life, if she cannot feel it in the moment, not learn it in the moment, it doesn’t matter.
Yesterday I was training a client and she was talking to me about dating dynamics. Told me how all her guy friends where complaining about women all being gold diggers and also wanting to go out on expensive dates
I told her that not true. All women don't want money it's probably the women they are dating because that doesn't happen to me often
She then corrected me and said "No it's different. You're attractive so women don't need you to do all that"
Pretty much she was saying that if a guy doesn't match a woman's physical preference he may need a bit more to get some play
And I have a feeling that most of the things you can do in the moment to create attraction do not need you to be a millionaire world traveller speaking 5 languages.
It’s something I’m really curious about by the way, because it is important for the general life goals we are having. For example, Is it more important to go and learn 2-3 more languages if I am not really using them, or focus on learning how to run a specific seduction system effectively when my goal is to sleep with more women.
For example if you talking to a goth chick and you start telling her about your companies and how much you travel it can actually cause more dissociation from her because she may not be into that stuff
But if instead you drop something about working with a popular alternative band, and also display some deeper understanding about her inner world she will hook better because now you seem like "you get it"
When I say "your value", what I really mean is "other people's assessment of your value". 100 people could look at the same guy, and they would all assess his value differently, even if they have the exact same information. Value is a totally emotionally processed metric. People's different assessment of your value explains why you could go into a 3set, and only one is attracted to you. They each percieve your value differently, despite having the same information about you. Also, for female attraction, more relevant than your value is the value differential. She might agree that you have high value, but she might still see her value as yet higher. Women feel this emotion of attraction only when they percieve your S&R value as greater than hers.
Remember that value is not a "real" thing. It exists only in people's perception of you. And so: is there a difference between "being" high value, and presenting high value? What does it actually mean to "be" high value? This question is surprisingly similar to the question, "is there such a good thing as "good" art?"
No, you’re gaming from the very first moment. You have your preopen value from what she sees: face/height/style, social proof, preselection, wealth indicators, etc. Then as you go in she continues to assess your value
That’s not gaming from the first moment. Unless you count fundementals as game. You literally just said FIRST she sees you fundementals. THEN your words/game comes after. As she assesses whether you’re cool, sexually experienced, not weird or thirsty.
Got it. So asking a girl, “Who lies more? Men or women?” Is a demonstration of higher value.
If they see value in your fundementals, your opener literally doesn’t matter (inb4 “so you’re saying you can open a girl, “hey do you want to fuck?” right away and it will work???”). Can say, “hey what’s up” and they’ll open themselves up to conversation.
Did you read the part where I said keep the momentum going even if she's not hooking? And get the hook ASAP before you can't keep the momentum any longer?
Well yeah. Which is the whole point of having very strong fundamentals. Don’t need to be stuck trying to game this one specific girl. When you know there are other girls that look just like her or better that WILL hook.
For example if you talking to a goth chick and you start telling her about your companies and how much you travel it can actually cause more dissociation from her because she may not be into that stuff
But if instead you drop something about working with a popular alternative band, and also display some deeper understanding about her inner world she will hook better because now you seem like "you get it"
Right. But this is pretty common sense. Talk to girls about things that matter to them. Which is the game part (relatable/similarity principle). If on the fundementals part your not what she likes, it doesn’t matter that you work with a popular alternative band. It’ll just come off as try hard because she can tell you’re trying to impress her. When she just isn’t attracted to you bro.
Spike said:
Right. But this is pretty common sense. Talk to girls about things that matter to them. Which is the game part (relatable/similarity principle). If on the fundementals part your not what she likes, it doesn’t matter that you work with a popular alternative band. It’ll just come off as try hard because she can tell you’re trying to impress her. When she just isn’t attracted to you bro.
And common sense ain't that common. Just because it seems basic to you doesn't mean everyone understands the concept
Maybe that's your experience that women have to head over heels with you to bang. But I also have experience laying girls that were not sold on me up front for wateva reason
Then later were all of a sudden open
Does it mean they were attracted to me the entire time and just playing hard to get? Or that I grew on them by being try hard?
Who knows and honestly I don't give a shit because I still got the lay
Sometimes a girl will bang you because she is horny, you're there and seem good enough for the time being
Because I'm sure at some point you've had the experience of opening a girl and it didn't really hook. You walk off to scope other prospects. Then run into the first girl later and magically the second time around she is more open to your advances
So what changed?
I will never discredit the power of physical attraction. But to imply that you must be a Chad to get success is misleading
Because whether you like it or not... that girl has probably had sex with a man LESS physically attractive that you or will probably have sex with someone LESS physically attractive than you in the future
Even my client now is currently having sex with a guy she admitted she was not crazy physically attracted to. He barely passed the threshold
And I have been with women that have experienced the same exact thing
So even though some of the points you make are true, they are still a narrow representation of how complex attraction can be
Since your perspective is working for you, I guess there's no real need for you to change it so carry on
That would be really interesting. I think I personally struggle a lot with what to say when the girl doesn’t hook instantly. Or when she is staying there talking to me very politely in a I would never sleep with you but let’s have a nice chat way.
My life was going in a way that I could have been a great husband candidate in fact, but at some point it started feeling like what I wanted is for the girls to deeply desire me for me, the emotional and sexual experience I offer and not because I am just a stable guy they can trust to raise their kids.
This is also very important and something I have to look at seriously at some point.
Because I have been a bit too much towards the belief of the emotional and sexual experience being what women really value. And I am not paying enough attention at demonstrating the social value, which makes me lose a bunch of women very early in the process.
Meaning they basically don’t see me as one of them, or a guy they would logically hook up with.
Can certainly improve the first ( especially in a targeted way, I wouldn’t say I am truly unattractive physically, but I surely don’t have a clear type I present )
The second is probably the one I am the best at right now.
The third one I can also improve by having certain prepared ways to present my value, and by calibrating them to the different kinds of girls I meet.
” and they’ll open themselves up to conversation.