Should I read "The Game" or "Models"

[empath]

+1

My short combo would be:

• Sleazy Stories (by Aaron Sleazy) - these are narratives to get you a sense of the energy and mindset in a MASF escalator type style
• Sixty - The Complete System (physical game) - technical manual - simpler concepts but with deep layers behind them
• Dave Riker - Language and Conversation - VERY technical manual.
• I would find one book to handle social abilities and more spit game, handle sets type book - Lovesystem has an audio series that runs through details on a lot of technical components eg roleplays, teasing, social proof methods, attraction types etc. that is super applicable and quick to the point while still giving insight.
• Potentially add Beyond words for physical presence game - study cajuns presence hard.

On top of that i would have a sharp skilled guy add particulars eg lock-ins and other key power moves hand picked from various styles. Eg Many bash RSD but juliens PIMP game eg. has a very strong opening to hook game component thats somewhat fast to learn and get effects from. Mystery has a load of heavy artillery elements like over the shoulder opening, body rocking etc.

These are potent tech-training reads with massive reading and training at home and in field. No time wasted cause its all gold.

Just curious, books written by Aaron Sleazy after Aaron sleezy seems to contradict PUA industry, especially he bashed whole NLP based game.

And I have read through Bishop's Journal, I liked his style. Even though its more complicated it gives far more control over approaches, in sense anchors keep reminding the girl, of you even when she is not with you.

That is something I want.

so, Is it possible of NLP based game is scam. Like it depends on the girl to keep thinking of you and she would have thought of you even if you have not used anchors. Eg girl A will think of you with anchors or without it and girl B won't think of you with anchors or without.

 

[James Cruse]

so, Is it possible of NLP based game is scam. Like it depends on the girl to keep thinking of you and she would have thought of you even if you have not used anchors. Eg girl A will think of you with anchors or without it and girl B won't think of you with anchors or without.

I think alot of guys got turned off NLP in seduction because they tried Speed Seduction (as I did) and found it was:

• long monologues and

•women constantly interrupted the Speed Seduction patterns and

•Always changed the subject (even though they were enjoying what you were saying immensely)

•Patterns were too long/hard to memorise/difficult to memorise so many variable patterns

•Couldn’t use Monologues or SS Patterns in nightclubs or bars due to the loud music & noise - so Speed Seduction is really only suitable for daygame (Ross never said this - just said he “hated nightclubs” - there’s a reason for that: his seduction method doesn’t work there)

This was also my experience when I tried Speed Seduction and repeatedly found it unwieldly, even in daygame (due to the above reasons).

But there are other more dynamic, punchier, and more useful NLP methods for daygame that remove the issues of Ross Jeffries/Dave Riker Speed Seduction.

Perhaps this is what Aaron Sleazy (and many others) are referring to when they discuss NLP seduction.

 

[Bill]

But there are other more dynamic, punchier, and more useful NLP methods for daygame that remove the issues of Ross Jeffries/Dave Riker Speed Seduction.

such as?

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

Title says it all. Looking for a good book to help my game
I hear "The Game" is more biography than actual lessons and advice on Game where as "Models" is a ton of inner game and nothing else.

+1 for The Game
It’s pretty much a step by step primer on what Strauss needed to go from nerd to attractive guy. So it’s easy to follow and copy in that respect, just dump the complicated magic tricks/NLP games and apply some **common sense** where needed .
Ought to level you up a few notches with the ladies

** re common sense - if it’s on with a woman no need to further run any head games just get to a location , escalate and get laid.

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

I think alot of guys got turned off NLP in seduction because they tried Speed Seduction (as I did) and found it was:

• long monologues and

•women constantly interrupted the Speed Seduction patterns and

•Always changed the subject (even though they were enjoying what you were saying immensely)

•Patterns were too long/hard to memorise/difficult to memorise so many variable patterns

•Couldn’t use Monologues or SS Patterns in nightclubs or bars due to the loud music & noise - so Speed Seduction is really only suitable for daygame (Ross never said this - just said he “hated nightclubs” - there’s a reason for that: his seduction method doesn’t work there)

This was also my experience when I tried Speed Seduction and repeatedly found it unwieldly, even in daygame (due to the above reasons).

But there are other more dynamic, punchier, and more useful NLP methods for daygame that remove the issues of Ross Jeffries/Dave Riker Speed Seduction.

Perhaps this is what Aaron Sleazy (and many others) are referring to when they discuss NLP seduction.

Sleazy poo poos quite a bit of seduction/ pickup game(most of it nowadays actually).

I agree with your opinion above to some extent. I’ve studied it at a fair depth over a few years and got a fair success with modified versions of patterns in places.

The funny thing re RJ /SS is that he kinda pitches it as “stealth” when in fact you’re making things/pitching ideas glaringly obvious to a woman. Just speaking womanese in delivering the message indirect / innuendo / allegorically,

I think it’s quite useful and powerful when it’s gotten down but also RJ goes too complex with it , into mind control / deep connection territory. It doesn’t work like that.

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

I’d like SS to “ advanced innuendo”
But you can just use simple innuendo to the same effect tbh.

 

[James Cruse]

The funny thing re RJ /SS is that he kinda pitches it as “stealth” when in fact you’re making things/pitching ideas glaringly obvious to a woman. Just speaking womanese in delivering the message indirect / innuendo / allegorically,

To me - the biggest issue with Speed Seduction Patterns (by Ross Jeffries or Riker) is that they’re:

1. Far too Long (get interrupted a tonne or she wants to talk about what she’s feeling or she changes the subject - unless she’s extremely passive)

2. Overly logical - alot of what these patterns do IS just long-winded frames told slightly metaphorically - women don’t really derive alot of actual emotional stimula

 

[James Cruse]

(Continued)-stimulation OR challenge or whatever - that approximates something seductive.

There’s a few people on here who recommend LONG winded monologue frames on women IN NOISY CLUBS - and expect women to hear all of what you said, pay attention (even if it’s
Super logical) and never interrupt or try to change to subject or interject their own stuff, often derailing whatever you’re saying.

It’s JUST NOT REALITY. Speed seduction was (rightly) shelved by a bunch of other seducers for these same reasons above (ala Swinggcat, Style, David DeAngelo, etc.)

I WISH women would never interrupt or interject and stay on ONE topic (until I change it much later) and would sit there listening quietly in awe as I deliver a LONG logical monologue about sex - but I’ve met women, tried it and live in reality.

 

[West_Indian_Archie]

There’s a few people on here who recommend LONG winded monologue frames on women IN NOISY CLUBS -

Back in the day, a lot of the speed seducers were doing the equivalent of today's day game. So coffee shops and book stores, and I guess some street game.

As alt seduction got more popular, guys with other styles came into the mix., and a generational preference for dance clubs and loud bars took over.

But even with the changing of the guard, a lot of the field reports I remembered were in lounges or guys that avoided the dance floor, focused on quieter areas, or started rapping to chicks on the street outside the club. They still needed good conditions to deliver properly.

(Imo);Most of the verbal content heavy tech from back then works best in a one on one setting where she can hear you, and you can hear her.

When I was heavy in the learning phase, I realized that for the clubs I was going to, canned lines had to be short and punchy, and my delivery mattered a lot more than my actual words. Nonverbal>>. Verbal.

Being sober around drunk people, girls especially, is a special kind of hell for me at the time. I had to say stuff that was funny/provocative that a drunk girl and her posse would have to get immediately.

So to cut through the "noise" - I had to say things that were outrageous and immediately visual.

For example, had a group of chicas dying of laughter over this

"She so bow legged, looks like she just got effed by a mule."

Imo, that's why a lot of "you totally look like the type of girl that does ". Is really effective because in that high distraction/high stimulus environment of a club, saying something that's personal to the girl, but not necessarily insulting, is the best way to capture her attention, and deliver a line with emotional impact.

To bring it back to SS, a lot of the same messages (subliminal or subconscious) can be delivered more piecemeal.

I honestly don't know if you get the intended effect of speed seduction when done this way, however, I've found that very visual and suggestive language is good at making you memorable and the conversation juicier.

My basic model is do and say stuff that makes chicks feel emotions, as fast as possible, as deep as possible, and as many different emotions as possible, and that's what makes you more engaging than guys with good paper stats.

At the same time, I'm not out there like you guys dealing with younger chicks that have heavy TikTok addictions

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

To me - the biggest issue with Speed Seduction Patterns (by Ross Jeffries or Riker) is that they’re:

1. Far too Long (get interrupted a tonne or she wants to talk about what she’s feeling or she changes the subject - unless she’s extremely passive)

2. Overly logical - alot of what these patterns do IS just long-winded frames told slightly metaphorically - women don’t really derive alot of actual emotional stimula

Yeah that is true re Jeffries stuff, 100%
his patterns were long and extremely hard to memorise. They came off weird and clunky IRL. It was Ross’ ideas of metaphors etc so a bit geeky and nice guy I found.

The related 2 courses by Dave Riker that came after were much more useful for me. he lays out that the patterns format were meant as a basic framework to build your own material with. To make them more everyday.
And he does a lot of training with tempo and tonalities. It’s a very good course. After that I had some very surprising results with my own versions. I sketched out a “pattern” about humid weather at a bar with a chick once, she got visibly super horny and I got laid that night in style from her. It really ramped up her arousal that instance how I was talking about HOT and WET weather etc etc she definitely got the metaphor,

I think Rikers courses are the best (and probably only) type of for training a guy how to talk seductively with that tempo and punching on words, commands etc. I haven’t come across another voice training course like that.

I’ll have to revisit it myself actually may help me atm.

for me writing down a bunch of sensual words on a list and then figuring out how to string them together in a pattern / story was quite useful about how to turn on chicks once I had them isolated to myself.

talking like that and using strong sexual body language together can be dynamite tbh. Needs practice tho and confidence obv on the delivery,

 

[Brassfaced_Jim]

I listened to some interview that David D did with some guy .. I think his name was Grant. He was a writer guy who turned to biz/coaching/ writing online dating stuff. He had a long list of words I took note of,

I started thinking..” ok so what do I know about what women feel like when they get aroused in the pussy?” What’s it feel like for a chick to be horny and hanging to get banged. Hmmm write out the words ..

off the top
- hot , pink, swelling , sweet tingles, wet, wetter, even wetter, soaking wet, throbbing, pulsating, willing, yearning, ripe, ready, blah blah… everything I could think of,

then next how do I string em all togehter in a pattern aka “cover story”? And how can I set that up beforehand so it’s a transition in convo,

I did experiments for a while with that in bars and clubs .. after some 5-10mins of convo to ramp escalation in a big way.
Chicks definitely picked up what I was putting down then. And lol’d sometimes. They got tingles and wetness for sure how I delivered it,

one chick memorable said to me
“ that’s creepy…. In ALL the RIGHT ways…”
I knew it was working after that.

 

[Energy]

I love the first part of Models but there's some contradictions in it. In the first part he talks about how men should not play game and in the second he teach "techniques". Plus with the fact that in his youth he did not get laid using the techniques in his books but from actual PUA techniques.

On another hand my problem with books is that they are too long, so fell into the trap of reading everything and getting "ready" without taking any action.

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

The Game is a great book if you read between the lines, there is a lot of useful practical stuff in there, but you have to pull on the strings and go deeper down the rabbit holes he mentions.

Models is okay, mostly I appreciated that book because he admits that pickup is a numbers game even when you get really good you'll still have to play the numbers... you'll have better success ratios but take more action = get more results.

Read them both.

 

[Bill]

I don’t like the first part of models. He says neediness is the problem, which I agree with, but says the solution is vulnerability. That doesn’t make sense to me and is even contradicted when he recounts his ex gfs orbiter who he said was vulnerable about his feelings for her multiple times and he uses her rejection of him as a example of neediness.

 

[Ratata]

Mystery Method (MM) (both the Venusian Arts and the other) gave me a lot and nothing at the same time.

Much of what's in there is pseudo-science, and while you can claim that it "works" correlation does not imply causation. Possibly the single most important thing that book did, was to get me out of the sofa. That alone will get you laid eventually.

As for Models, idk, haven't read.

Do I still recommend MM? Yes, but with a lot of caveats. It's way too formulaic, and imho you're better off finding your true self than wearing a mask. But wearing a mask to begin with, can set you free in ways. That's why I still recommend that stuff. Also Erik is kind of the mainstream OG of PU. If nothing else it's good to know some of the most important lore before delving into this weird and often nerdy community.

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

imho you're better off finding your true self than wearing a mask.

I agree with this. I really got into MM in 2006 but within a few months I replaced all their routines with my own. Just material that hits all the same switches but is authentic to my life, my stories, different IVDs, etc.

That way you can still use the complete formula in every detail but without wearing a mask or being fake or telling stories that never actually happened to you.

 

[West_Indian_Archie]

I don’t like the first part of models. He says neediness is the problem, which I agree with, but says the solution is vulnerability. That doesn’t make sense to me and is even contradicted when he recounts his ex gfs orbiter who he said was vulnerable about his feelings for her multiple times and he uses her rejection of him as a example of neediness.

His whole schtick is kinda weird, but his idea of vulnerability (as I remember it) is not actually being "vulnerable" in the popular sense, but saying what's on your mind even if it makes you look bad, or disagree with the prospect

That is more like "radical honesty" and not being "vulnerable"

With that in mind, the neediness in this case, is that the guy "needs" the girl to like him.

And this neediness is why guys pretend to agree with the girl on everything. It might be true, of might be fake, but in the world of girls, men will be as accommodating as possible in order to smash.

But

If he suddenly says and does things that are "true" to him, that open him up for criticism, *that a girl disagree with, makes himself "vulnerable" - that actually is the proper correction to neediness -

by being "vulnerable" he's not being needy.

 

[Skills]

His whole schtick is kinda weird, but his idea of vulnerability (as I remember it) is not actually being "vulnerable" in the popular sense, but saying what's on your mind even if it makes you look bad, or disagree with the prospect

That is more like "radical honesty" and not being "vulnerable"

With that in mind, the neediness in this case, is that the guy "needs" the girl to like him.

And this neediness is why guys pretend to agree with the girl on everything. It might be true, of might be fake, but in the world of girls, men will be as accommodating as possible in order to smash.

But

If he suddenly says and does things that are "true" to him, that open him up for criticism, *that a girl disagree with, makes himself "vulnerable" - that actually is the proper correction to neediness -

by being "vulnerable" he's not being needy.

Is more polirization, and yes it has its limits.. i said to people to ignore a bit the vulnerability cause guys use as tech same with polirization that guys like tate use as tech .. but the neediness part investment and rest really good... The game practical tech is kinda of screening game....

 

[Bill]

His whole schtick is kinda weird, but his idea of vulnerability (as I remember it) is not actually being "vulnerable" in the popular sense, but saying what's on your mind even if it makes you look bad, or disagree with the prospect

That is more like "radical honesty" and not being "vulnerable"

With that in mind, the neediness in this case, is that the guy "needs" the girl to like him.

And this neediness is why guys pretend to agree with the girl on everything. It might be true, of might be fake, but in the world of girls, men will be as accommodating as possible in order to smash.

But

If he suddenly says and does things that are "true" to him, that open him up for criticism, *that a girl disagree with, makes himself "vulnerable" - that actually is the proper correction to neediness -

by being "vulnerable" he's not being needy.

If you feel you need her to like you, it’s because you are trying to use her validation to meet unmet emotional needs.

I don’t see how just saying what you are thinking resolves this. Self censorship to get her to like you can be a symptom of neediness, but it’s not the whole thing so I don’t think actively resisting that impulse resolves it.

Take a guy who has major oneitis for a girl, would him being radically honest actually resolve that behavior? I don’t think so.

I havent read it in a while so he may address it and I’m forgetting, but self censorship by itself isn’t always an example of neediness, you can do that as just a part of social skills or to succeed with women not because you are needy for it but because you desire it for other reasons.

 

[West_Indian_Archie]

If you feel you need her to like you, it’s because you are trying to use her validation to meet unmet emotional needs.

I don’t see how just saying what you are thinking resolves this. Self censorship to get her to like you can be a symptom of neediness, but it’s not the whole thing so I don’t think actively resisting that impulse resolves it.

Take a guy who has major oneitis for a girl, would him being radically honest actually resolve that behavior? I don’t think so.

I havent read it in a while so he may address it and I’m forgetting, but self censorship by itself isn’t always an example of neediness, you can do that as just a part of social skills or to succeed with women not because you are needy for it but because you desire it for other reasons.

I don't like Manson.
I don't like Models
I don't like his ideas.

I'm just trying to explain how he thinks his "game" works.

Personally, I think radical honesty/no filter is more annoying than anything.

That said, his method has lots of fans, and presumably they are fans of it because it gets results. (Though I think they're fans of it, because it confirms their biases and world view. That's been my impression from Seddit and most other seduction forums that some how attract a lot of "just be yourself"/"best version of yourself" guys)