Never use a direct opener

[MrVariety]

"hi I saw you and I think you're cute" vs "hey how are you?"

Which is best? The answer is that neither ... your intention is to open a woman "MAN TO WOMAN."

And if you're not able to do this by sub-communication, you have to resort to making it explicit by literally saying it.

Direct openers is a SYMPTOM of lacking sub communication. If a woman doesn't know why you're talking to her without you literally telling her why, then that's where the problem is.

Ideally you should be able to walk to up to a woman and say "Hello."

And when she turns around and she sees a man in front of her... she looks into his eyes and see eyes burning with desire - she senses a sexual energy from his body language, she smells his fucking pheromones and good cologne that screams sexuality. A deep grounded voice that is confident and that he's not afraid to dominate her.

You could be talking about your dog or what you like to eat for breakfast and your voice is dripping of sexuality, and that you're not afraid of her, you're not afraid to rip off her clothes in private, you're dead serious about going all the way.

Being direct is not about telling her explicitly with your rehearsed words -- repeating the robotic "opener" with your flat weak voice trying desperately to establish a sexual frame. Being DIRECT is about actually exposing your sexuality, your real, dead serious intentions, in a congruent, unapologetic way.

The reason why direct openers usually fail is that they come from a place of lack. They are trying to compensate for a unambiguous clarity of intentions you should otherwise carry. Direct openers flowered with compliments also come from a place of lack, because you sense that you can't truly GIVE something to her by your good sexual energy - so you try to compensate by giving in terms of words. Never works.

That is not to say that opening with a clear verbal expression of interest is always wrong. It's that it's usually practiced from a place of lack.

MV

 

[Skills]

and yet there are literally 100s of guys getting laid using "direct openers" , this is coming from a guy that barely uses direct openers if ever....

They do work, specially in short time situations, when you have nothing to say and your mind goes blank... There are literally 2 - 5 lay reports last month of guys that went direct...

I think it has it places such as day game (short time to operate), rush situations... Newer guys, more aggressive countries (brazil/eastern europe)

 

[barneystin]

eh i open direct pretty frequently
“hey you’re cute, what’s ur name”


i’ve even done “oh wow, you’re gorgeous” when a girl caught me off guard (i don’t usually go this far but when it happens, it happens)

opener is just to open the interaction for the most part, wouldn’t stress it

 

[ulrich]

I agree with @Skills.

An indirect opener is ideal but that doesnt mean direct openers are bad.
They are very convenient for certain kind of interactions (mainly with constrained logistics)

 

[James D]

"hi I saw you and I think you're cute" vs "hey how are you?"

Which is best? The answer is that neither ... your intention is to open a woman "MAN TO WOMAN."

And if you're not able to do this by sub-communication, you have to resort to making it explicit by literally saying it.

Direct openers is a SYMPTOM of lacking sub communication. If a woman doesn't know why you're talking to her without you literally telling her why, then that's where the problem is.

Ideally you should be able to walk to up to a woman and say "Hello."

And when she turns around and she sees a man in front of her... she looks into his eyes and see eyes burning with desire - she senses a sexual energy from his body language, she smells his fucking pheromones and good cologne that screams sexuality. A deep grounded voice that is confident and that he's not afraid to dominate her.

You could be talking about your dog or what you like to eat for breakfast and your voice is dripping of sexuality, and that you're not afraid of her, you're not afraid to rip off her clothes in private, you're dead serious about going all the way.

Being direct is not about telling her explicitly with your rehearsed words -- repeating the robotic "opener" with your flat weak voice trying desperately to establish a sexual frame. Being DIRECT is about actually exposing your sexuality, your real, dead serious intentions, in a congruent, unapologetic way.

The reason why direct openers usually fail is that they come from a place of lack. They are trying to compensate for a unambiguous clarity of intentions you should otherwise carry. Direct openers flowered with compliments also come from a place of lack, because you sense that you can't truly GIVE something to her by your good sexual energy - so you try to compensate by giving in terms of words. Never works.

That is not to say that opening with a clear verbal expression of interest is always wrong. It's that it's usually practiced from a place of lack.

MV

It's obvious you're not talking from experience.

Direct openers work. I use them all the time.

 

[Kvothe]

It's obvious you're not talking from experience.

Direct openers work. I use them all the time.

same

also

LR - American latina insta date street approach sdl

Back story - I’m doing some coaching with Chase and it’s helped me work out a lot of things. I’m really looking to hone my ability to consistently get girls who are 8.5+. One of the main things we discussed was coming up with my personal vision of my ideal girl. Everything specifics - looks...

www.skilledseducer.com

lol

 

[MrVariety]

I agree with @Skills.

An indirect opener is ideal but that doesnt mean direct openers are bad.
They are very convenient for certain kind of interactions (mainly with constrained logistics)

Yep. Direct is especially useful in certain interaction where there's too little time or too much pressure to properly develop a unambiguous sexual frame. And that's exactly my point: direct openers are compensatory, not ideal.

Ideally you should standing in queue in the grocery store and say "Hey how are you" to the girl behind the cashier and she would know your intentions. The reason why direct openers work when indirect don't is because sub-communication isn't always strong enough. But realistically speaking, I can't say I feel like I am always able to do that, so I have to compensate with direct openers.

It's obvious you're not talking from experience.

I made a click bait post title - fair - but if you read my post I never said it didn't work.

MV

 

[ulrich]

Ideally you should standing in queue in the grocery store and say "Hey how are you" to the girl behind the cashier and she would know your intentions. The reason why direct openers work when indirect don't is because sub-communication isn't always strong enough. But realistically speaking, I can't say I feel like I am always able to do that, so I have to compensate with direct openers.

Fair.

Still, worth mentioning there is even more nuance... positioning, timing... also what about if the girl is a knucklehead and she doesnt get subtext?

But OK. Your first post seemed like a war on direct openers.
Now I see it was not the intention.

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

I agree with Mr Variety,

I can open with one word “Hey” that can be pretty direct in intent, and risking ‘creepy/sleazy” .

it’s really not what you say, but the way it’s said.

e.g. - “Heyyyyyyyyyyy” combined with an eyebrow flash / cocked eyebrow , twinkle in the eye and a sexy smirk is all that is required. That translates as “hey , Im a confident ,sexually available , red blooded male. I thought you were sexy, and i am starting this interaction to try get in your pants.”

that’s all said in one word , a tone of voice and a facial expression.

 

[Skills]

I agree with Mr Variety,

I can open with one word “Hey” that can be pretty direct in intent, and risking ‘creepy/sleazy” .

it’s really not what you say, but the way it’s said.

e.g. - “Heyyyyyyyyyyy” combined with an eyebrow flash / cocked eyebrow , twinkle in the eye and a sexy smirk is all that is required. That translates as “hey , Im a confident ,sexually available , red blooded male. I thought you were sexy, and i am starting this interaction to try get in your pants.”

that’s all said in one word , a tone of voice and a facial expression.

hey is not a direct opener, is an attention grabber, similar to an approach invite...

 

[MrVariety]

hey is not a direct opener, is an attention grabber, similar to an approach invite...

Direct vs. indirect shouldn't be in terms of what you say - but the context and sub-communication of what gets across to the girl.

Guys who know sub communication, especially testosteronized males, can say "Hey how is it going" and she knows....

What makes a direct approach is whether I have the intention of letting her know I am approaching her with sexual interest.

If I don't want her to know I am sexually interested --- that will be an indirect approach --- but then again, why would I ever do that? I can't think of a single instance.

MV

 

[OldGuy]

You say "How is it going" without sexual intent to some people so as not seem like a horndog.

 

[Skills]

Direct vs. indirect shouldn't be in terms of what you say - but the context and sub-communication of what gets across to the girl.

Guys who know sub communication, especially testosteronized males, can say "Hey how is it going" and she knows....

What makes a direct approach is whether I have the intention of letting her know I am approaching her with sexual interest.

If I don't want her to know I am sexually interested --- that will be an indirect approach --- but then again, why would I ever do that? I can't think of a single instance.

MV

water is wet, the sky is blue, the earth is round... any other groundbreaking insights...

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

hey is not a direct opener, is an attention grabber, similar to an approach invite...

All I would say is this -
I would never open with “Hey I thought you were cute and I had to come talk to you” or any such variant,

why? Because it’s so generic , beige and VANILLA. It’s fucking lame AF imo .

it’s ironic that at one point Canned Indirect Game was bashed & binned and replaced with this Direct Approach/Compliment Opener .. as that compliment line is the most canned -sounding lame shit ever.

As they say -First impressions count
Or another way of saying it “you don’t get a second chance to make a First impression”.

like.. show a bit of Flair FFS. Have some fun and creativity with it and show value off the opener,

With such a line as this, a guy may as well be saying;
“ Hey, i can’t flirt …”

Or longer form;
“Hey I can’t flirt or handle any kind of build of sexual tension , so I just had to tell you you’re cute to get all that out of the way as quickly as possible .”

This guy just took the most enjoyable part of the interaction for a chick .. and flushed it down the toilet . Great job

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

I’ll sperg on a follow up as these debates are a pet peeve of mine . The debate usually relates to Day Gaming activities and openers.

Guys caveat direct approaching with the’ time constraint situation’ to justify the lame direct compliment line . Which is kinda bullshit.

If a chick is running off some where - let her go . There’s not enough time to Hook her in.
Being good looking and giving her a mild compliment and a quick bit of screening in a 5 minute window is nowhere near enough to hook her in and get her responding positively later over text messages.

it doesn’t really work and he’s just gonna be tryna push shit uphill .

Unless his SMV is way higher than hers and she’s super green just based on his Looks value.

Ie - he’s a Chad type guy and she’s average, single and horny.

 

[Skills]

I’ll sperg on a follow up as these debates are a pet peeve of mine . The debate usually relates to Day Gaming activities and openers.

Guys caveat direct approaching with the’ time constraint situation’ to justify the lame direct compliment line . Which is kinda bullshit.

If a chick is running off some where - let her go . There’s not enough time to Hook her in.
Being good looking and giving her a mild compliment and a quick bit of screening in a 5 minute window is nowhere near enough to hook her in and get her responding positively later over text messages.

it doesn’t really work and he’s just gonna be tryna push shit uphill .

Unless his SMV is way higher than hers and she’s super green just based on his Looks value.

Ie - he’s a Chad type guy and she’s average, single and horny.

Again and there are 100s of guys getting laid like that in places like new York.... This was paul janka game in ny... Again from a guy that believes in strong interactions... In festival in Miami i used to do this type of game as well...

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

Again and there are 100s of guys getting laid like that in places like new York.... This was paul janka game in ny... Again from a guy that believes in strong interactions... In festival in Miami i used to do this type of game as well...

Yes and they are all CHAD tier guys, macking on chicks below them in SMV.

They say Paul Janka was batting something like 10% conversion . That’s 1 lay in 10 number closes.
but he also was a total Chad guy. Tall, dark and *very* good looking.

other users here say his conversion rate was actually only 1.5% (!) from his own disclosed records, that’s 1 lay in 67 number closes.

and that’s Paul Janka the Chad.

So why are average smv guys trying to run a high smv guys Game? Makes no sense to me…

 

[famineofcrows]

I don't think it really matters. Both work and Both fail in my experience. Depends on her attraction towards you. Community has always been split down the middle, pretty much. Long books from both camps explaining why their way is the best

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

I don't think it really matters. Both work. Both fail. Depends on her attraction towards you. Community has always been split down the middle, pretty much. Long books from both camps explaining why their way is the best

Well it does actually. If a guy is out beating the streets daily doing a 50 approaches per week (or whatever ) and deluding himself this is the ‘shortcut’ or the best way to get laid.

day Game is horribly inefficient in terms of Effort to Reward ratio. Even for Paul Janka it was , (and others) , that’s why those guys burn out, give up, and move away from it ?

the stats and stories are already out there in pickup land, blogs and videos on YT.

Here’s Brent talking about his old days of going out 7 nights a week and being a ‘Master Persuer of Women’ and look at him (Tall ,great looking, high smv guy) .

this video above is solid gold btw re his mindset & screening process.

like, any guy running street approach as his main ‘ game’ is by definition a ‘master persuer’ …
And also, any guy ‘beating the streets for pussy’ is inherently a Low Value Male in women’s eyes . They are not stupid, they can see / feel that he does such for a living.
Especially with his lame vanilla compliment opener. That’s a dead giveaway to women also.

so there … HEAPS of debate points as to why it is a bad idea to run this as a ‘main Game’.

 

[ulrich]

Well... I must be an oddity then because I used to run the "I just saw you and thought you look cute" whenever I couldnt coke up with a good opener and I am confident I was getting consistently past the hook point (30% or so)(directed approaches, not spraying and praying)

No offense @Brassfaced_Jim, but I feel you're acting a little to much of a purist with this subject.
You don't lose points for doing direct... its just lower probability. You also dont need to be a gigaCHAD, Im 5'6"