Technical / Routine game vs Natural / State based game: why the disconnect?

[Bill]

One of the things that confuses me the most is why so many in the community and so many instructors have such strong differing views on the effectiveness and placement of technical or routine based teachings compared to natural or state based teachings.

Basically the three views seem to be that technical or routine based game is unnecessary as a whole, you should start with it but later shift to a more natural approach, or you should start with a natural approach then shift to routine or technical game to get even better.

Examples:

RSD Tyler learned technical / routine based game, but later moved to natural or state based game, in this video he argues technical game just comes across as bad acting and hurts your self esteem, whereas “inner game” is far more effective.

Honest Signalz has a similar history and argument, basically saying social situations are too random and you should follow your feelings and learn from experience

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

I believe Cajun from love systems was going through a similar trajectory before he retired, though he learned and taught from the routine based love systems teachings. Basically saying he doesn’t think the actual words mattered and it was all about the students emotions and confidence.

Just yesterday I watched a stream from a long time PUA hobbyist who basically says he initially learned technique based game but now claims it’s all about subconscious emotional signals and he doesn’t think at all when doing game, in fact claiming he does better just dancing and the routines he used were no different results wise than what he says naturally with confidence. He rambles a lot but he discusses it around 39:47 or 1:10:24

DECEMBER 24 Going live to talk about pickup: connection over transaction

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

But here is Todd V, who initially did routine based mystery method, later taught at RSD and adopted their more state based approach, but when he was fired and started his own company basically says now inner game is only useful insofar as it effects your outer behavior and what you say is the most important thing

Discovery (former mystery wing) says something similar and that routines are there to learn but useful at all levels

I can’t find it now but I saw a Neil Strauss clip where he says something similar saying at his stage he just plays it by instinct and routines are only necessary for beginners. I also saw other clips of AFC Adam Lyons basically spaying inner game isn’t real and all that matters is what you do, and naturals themselves use routines without knowing it and the only issue with routines is you get bored of them.

But Chase despite not using routines himself, says they are actually best for guys who are already good to become even more proficient. I saw a similar notion from the coach insane flirt regarding natural vs technical game.

https://www.skilledseducer.com/threads/10-lays-from-1000-approaches.27101/post-156947

Conclusion:

What I find strangest about it, is it seems like guys will eventually default to one of these perspectives regardless of the environment they learn or teach from provided they continue long enough.

But it just seems way to fundamental an issue to be explained simply by personality type or learning styles. You’d think continuous testing with students and women wouldn’t have such a disconnect in beliefs about say do the words used matter.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

The more things change, the more they stay the same...

 

[Will_V]

The way I see it, learning techniques is useful for the following:

- To give a basic roadmap for how to proceed as a beginner
- To bypass psychological obstructions/disfunctionalities and bad habits
- To give a roadmap for dealing with complex situations
- To give a sense of confidence and surety to guys whose minds function best with a technique based approach

For me personally, I tend to start at the technique, and work back toward the principle. Principles are king in my worldview. I can't stick with techniques for long because I simply don't think in a technical way around women. I may try a technique, but then through experience I must get an intuition for what principle it served, or it is useless to me - there are too many variables in a seduction for a technique to be any more than crudely applicable at any given time. It must be adjusted to the situation, balanced with other things, modified, all to serve the principle.

For example, a principle may be "she needs to be more invested than you". That's not a technique - you can use many different techniques to achieve it. But the principle is what guides you. You can express yourself in a whole range of different ways as long as the sum total is agreeable to the principle.

I am a fairly intuitive person by nature, my mind operates with associations, metaphors, and analogies rather than logically straightforward or factual theses about reality. I can translate from the former to the latter but not without losing something in the process.

I believe this is the way that nature contrives to make us and all other animals - the things which are most fundamental to us are, as quickly as possible, moved out of the conscious realm into the subconscious and the instincts, so as to give them a much more fluid, uninhibited, and powerful expression. Only that which we find somewhat alien to us, we have to think deeply and in detail about, and perform in a rigorously technical manner, so as to achieve by rote what the depths of our minds and bodies fail to perform spontaneously for us.

The truth is that not all people are the same. I do lean toward 'natural' expression as being more powerful and effective than technically derived expression, for the reason I just mentioned. But, for the reasons I listed right at the top of the post, looking at seduction technically is a way to un-submerge what isn't working into the conscious realm, replace it with what does work, and with any luck enable it to return to its place in the subconscious at some point as a fully integrated part of our natural expression.

Perhaps there are people who must always more or less think consciously about everything, and for them no doubt the technical approach is king. But I am somewhere on the other side of the spectrum.

 

[Chase]

Here's a realization I have come to over the years:

Guys tend to internalize what they initially learn, then discount it, and view whatever they learn later on as the REAL master-level stuff.

So, for instance, say you start with routine-based game. You learn a shit ton of routines, all this chick crack, cool things to do with girls, get decent with that. But you never fixed your inner game. Then you fix your inner game, it streamlines your delivery, microexpressions, vibe, move-making, etc., and all of a sudden you're at another level. You look at that and decide, "Whoa. It was all about inner game / being natural, all along. That's the real master level stuff!"

But say you do it the other way. You focus hard on vibe, get a super cool vibe, get real smooth, get your inner game sorted. You are getting laid, getting results. But then one day you start experimenting with routines. These routines, combined with your already-sorted vibe, then catapult you to a new level of success. You realize that routines are the master level stuff, not to be used by beginners, but instead something that can amplify an already skilled guy's approach and take him to mastery.

Personally, I spent a long time pooh-poohing inner game as a bunch of New Age clap-trap malarkey. Outer game was 100% where it was at for me. That was all you needed.

But one day I realized I had done a ton of inner game work before I ever found the pickup community, and basically already had my inner game buttoned up; I was just lacking a few bits and pieces here and there, inner-game wise, most of which were themselves resolved within my first year being in the game, but my outer game was seriously lacking.

A guy coming to seduction with a bunch of blue pill mentalities, who has never meditated, has low emotional awareness, little emotional control, lots of personal self-doubt, a loser mentality, is approval-seeking, has a tendency to chase, etc., is coming in in a completely different position than I was starting out. If that guy comes in and learns a bunch of outer game, then 3 or 4 years in discovers inner game, that will be a breakthrough for him and he will decide, "Whoa, this was what I was missing all along!"

The thing is... you are still using the first thing you learned. You have incorporated it already. But you tend to discount the stuff you learn once it's internalized enough.

We had a guy return to the forum years ago saying that he'd wasted a year and a half learning Girls Chase material but hadn't gotten laid from any of it. Then he hit the gym for a year and a half and now he was banging gym bunnies with ease. He said 100% of that was due to him being in the gym having muscles now. Then he posted a lay report to show how he was not using anything but his muscles (or whatever) and the entire report was him chase framing, deep diving, and a bunch of other stuff he learned from the site. I was like, "How can someone be this dense "

Let me tl;dr this:

Whatever you learned first, be it inner or outer game, natural or routine-based game, you will tend to consider 'beginner level' stuff. Whatever you learn later, be it inner or outer game, natural or routine-based game, you will tend to consider 'the missing piece', 'the thing that takes men to mastery', etc.

The reality is you need both solid inner and outer game to reach your full potential with women, but you ARE going to focus on one far more than the other at first.

Whichever one you focus on second, to you that will be the "the thing that really propelled me to mastery."

Chase

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

I can confirm that, was my case... I started with natural 100% improvised game in 2002... found mystery method 3-4 years later and for a while thought it's superior... but ultimately combining both is the only way to get superior results.

 

[Skills]

ideally you want to start natural then learn game, cause what you did good naturally will make more sense, and the mistakes you made doing naturally it will be more understandable...

A problem is that naturals will go through a period of not understanding some concepts or quick to dismiss due to lack of maturity or this:

That phenomenon is called the Dunning-Kruger effect, a cognitive bias where people with low ability in a certain area mistakenly overestimate their competence because they lack the self-awareness to recognize their own shortcomings and the complexity of the subject. In the workplace, it means someone inexperienced might think they're an expert, while actual experts often underestimate their skills, notes Verywell Mind.

i would be worry of coaches advocating one thing or the other, they are bias.... You need to field test.... Also check out my post on the subject:

The problem with a few naturals and anti-gamers that join the community----

Some of This happened to me when i joined the community in fairness i was not as bad as what i am seeing today, so i know what i am talking about (the thing is I would not be as retarded as guys that are rightfully ban from the forum and i was actually open and looking for answers all along...

www.skilledseducer.com

 

[Francis]

Have there been any guys here since the Girls Chase forum and Skilled Seducer that even use routines besides the sex talk gambits? Never seen it in the field reports.

I think M3 is great if you consider S phases as seduction location only (it starts with point of no return foreplay after all), and set early sexual frames.

So I can see the value of routines to accomplish the goal of each phase at hyperspeed. Never tried them, but even natural game needs some structure. Plus don't naturals still tend to reuse some soundbites like anyone retelling a story will probably naturally repeat phrases.

 

[James Cruse]

I think "Routines" were a way for seduction coaches to either:

1. Make money (and continue making money) without giving away the principles for how their seduction actually works.

2. Give Logical examples of how to do something that you can use as a beginner, either due to:

(1.) above or because saying things to beginners that they don't understand or have any referential experience is difficult for them to understand (and they always need to understand everything logically, from my experience) and

(2.) to have something concrete and ready-made to use for beginners.

From what I can see, the best material about seduction is where they give you the principles of why and how something works and where to use it - then give concrete real-world examples.
But those examples will always be limited and there a million other possibilities you could come up with yourself, based on the principle, that are much better for you and the situation you're in.

Mystery took the principles from a bunch of different people and created routines from those principles, but mostly didn't teach the principles. Then he organised them in a logical way (even though seductions aren't logical and straightforward) to make it easiwr and more marketable (even if it was wrong).
Mystery mostly took from Swinggcat (who used some principles from Ross Jeffries, broadly from NLP and his own observations of what he found worked for himself & others) and simply made indirect routines and games that worked for him.

Like it's said above - there are a million ways to use principles in seduction outside of these routines, so why be boxed in or cornered into them when talking with women?

I think this is one of the glaring differences between natural seducers and routine-based seducers - naturals understand the principles and act instinctively (often unconsciously) based on those principles.
Whereas routine-based guys will be cornering themselves with techniques to use, that sometimes or often, just make no sense in the situation or are weak, because they don't know what else to do. It means naturals are more flexible and can deal with so many variables that routines can't deal with.

Seduction we learn should ideally be between the two: Learning the principles (unlike routines-based guys) AND being consciously aware of those principles (unlike naturals, who are usually unconscious of the principles).

I also think routines mislead men into misunderstanding women and what they want and why.
So these routine based guys that don't know the principles of how or why whatever they're doing is working or failing - they don't know how to fix it, in the moment or upon reflection later. So they either keep failing, it takes a long time to improve or they have to pay someone to help.

Once you find the principles - you can find a million examples in seduction material and even make up your own on the fly in the moment, usually to suit the situation. This is so freeing and makes everything more fun and allows alot more success, due to the flexibility to apply successfully wherever you are.

 

[Skills]

Have there been any guys here since the Girls Chase forum and Skilled Seducer that even use routines besides the sex talk gambits? Never seen it in the field reports.

I think M3 is great if you consider S phases as seduction location only (it starts with point of no return foreplay after all), and set early sexual frames.

So I can see the value of routines to accomplish the goal of each phase at hyperspeed. Never tried them, but even natural game needs some structure. Plus don't naturals still tend to reuse some soundbites like anyone retelling a story will probably naturally repeat phrases.

There are couple... 1 is in France tryst in the forum and karea did too...i used teevester routines for a while as well..

 

[JollyRoger]

I agree that across the learning journey there will be a shift in emphasis between inner and outer game, techniques, tactics, strategies and principles. And the details of how that all plays out will differ between individuals.

As the others have already stated, the two should not be disconnected. There should be a continual back and forth between the inner and outer.

To answer the OPs question. It could be simply that the perception that there is a disconnect is because the the dating advice niche is fully commercialised. As far as I can tell 'technical / tactical / outer game' has fallen out of favour in favour of generalised red-pill philosophy. Perhaps due to market forces. The general population wants watered down ideas, an easy set of instructions to follow. "Just looks max", "Just be confident", "Just say this line", "Just make money", Just have social proof".... "Now buy my course".

I would say that outer game seems to have gone underground again and I'm believer that it can meaningfully move the dial whatever your experience or skill level. A beginner can learn a lot from having a single cocky line to use during a conversation (seeing the reactions, roleplaying what it's like to be that guy etc.) and an advanced person knows that some 'routines' (everything from a single line or question, up to a story or game/gambit) are extremely efficient or potent.

(Outer) Game is still a thing that works IMO.

 

[Francis]

Can't find the @Chase quote about deep diving technically being a routine, but to me that is the beauty of this website and the essence of the Bruce Lee way.

I don't want to be a robot delivering a script besides maybe one or two well placed gambits.

But to have a structural framework is a blessing. Like @James Cruse said Mystery's routines are based on principles. So your "routine" can be:

- Situational opener
- Handclasp
- Cold read
- Tease
- Chase frame
- Lock in
- Qualify
- Move
- Build rapport

And of course the SAC model. To me a hybrid style is the ultimate roadmap that retains naturally discovering the individual you're talking to.

Something Razorjack said is he wants to feel like he's falling in love with every woman he meets. I like the idea of having a high odds, replicable process that still lets you witness her internal beauty Zan style.

Even Pandora's Box with a zillion if/then statements I think can act as a framework for natural game.

 

[Tryst]

There are couple... 1 is in France tryst

I live with a bunch of PUAs, I know many more, and I am the only one I know who runs MM. There is only one other guy I know that even can run MM, and he chooses not to for the most part.

You could put it down to stylistic differences, but actually, I am the only one of us who can run group sets effectively. Make of that what you will.

 

[Kshatrap A.V.]

One more thing is that the question whether it's the inner game or the outer game that works is crazy. Both things are necessary.

And funny thing is that a man would spend years improving on his inner game and will have some realisations and then would start thinking that had he had those realisations in the beginning.. he wouldn't have spend all this time so he starts preaching those ideals to newbies. But never realising that it was actually the result of years worth of improving on inner game that lead him to such realisations.

And he would also forget all the outer action he took that helped him in changing inner beliefs.

And let's suppose there is another guy who focused more on technical game for years and then got results and then would start preaching it to people and thinking that lines matter, technique matters etc. but he won't realise that how much he was also focusing on maintaining his inner frame, mood.

The reality is like what others have spoken here. You need both components. If you train in mma or any sports, you learn the technique and you also learn how to fight naturally in a fight. And both things are inter related.

But anyways, the focus should be on getting improving and getting results.

I don't know who wrote this on this forum like just cuz if some stranger who is walking in street is in good mood, that won't make him better in doing your office job. I think it was @Will_V .

And cuz even I had some realisations of my own in life recently so I now believe that if there is something that I must do then it should not matter what my feelings are. And here I can relate to what @Chase wrote above as I had disregarded this idea years ago and focused so much on believing that I would succeed and cuz of that didn't took much action.

 

[West_Indian_Archie]

What are your thoughts?

TL/DR

Cynical reason - Inner game is just easier for guys to try out, and easier for guys to teach. Canned Game is harder to teach and harder to learn.

Practical Reason - Instructors basically internalize all of the techniques and do them without knowing that they're doing them. (the same criticism early guys in the community had about naturals)

My take - it's a false dichotomy. Regular people tell the same story about how they met their partners, first kiss, first date, first job, first time they got drunk etc - all the damn time. People use canned game all the time. And it works.

Good tech game will bag chicks, but most guys realize it's a pointless pursuit because chicks are usually not that cool.

The Long Part

Taking it back to the "good old days"

The essential problem that fast seduction seemed to answer is

I see a girl that I like, what do I say?

That's the issue - guys don't know what to say.

These guys don't even know how to start the conversation.

But other guys know that the conversation, skillfully used, can lead to hooking up.

Here's how underground rapper Ras Kass put it

Wants to know my occupation, home location, and means of transportation
The correct combination unlocked your placenta
I got a cellular phone with a rubber antenna
On a three story house, drive a 4-door Ac'
Favorite song of all time: Mobb Deep's "Hit It From the Back"

Enter "Speed Seduction"

Patterns - come from Speed Seduction - which comes from Neuro Linguistic Programming. Back in the day, folks wouldn't stop talking about the "October Man" sequence. The idea behind speed seduction is that a man can subconsciously program a woman to want him.

Says to a woman, "you below me" - is subconsciously understood as "You blow me"

I'm not saying subliminal programming doesn't work. The academic studies suggest no.

But how far off is what NLP is doing versus sales and advertising?

Are people programmable? In the aggregate? Yes.

On an individual basis? That's where we can start to have a real conversation, that's where we can map out scenarios and test limits.

Patterns became routines - mostly because I think that Style, a failed stand up comedian, and Mystery, a failed street magician - understood that a well rehearsed and understood script, with great timing and delivery will absolutely DESTROY improvisation.

A good stand up comic doesn't get on stage and just wing it. Part of the show is that improvisation/just being a funny guy (aka crowd work) but the actual show is not.

The stand up comic has an idea, something they think might be funny to A LOT OF people, not just their close friends. So they write, and then they perform the joke in front of people. And they keep iterating on the joke until 99% people laugh at it. Maybe they need to pause, maybe they need to change their voice, maybe it's an inflection, perhaps it's a look - but the joke is practiced for quite some time.

If they ever make it to the HBO special level - they've done that material, that hour long collection of jokes, for hundreds if not thousands of hours - and all of the material kills.

A good magician doesn't just wing it either. So much time, preparation, practice, has to be done in order to create the emotional effect of doing a trick. Nobody saws a woman in half without having done it a bunch of times.

Routines, Canned Scripts aka Classic Old School Game makes a lot of sense.

Imagine if you'd been out to clubs, been doing day game for years. And the way that you pulled was by telling good jokes, great stories, and having impromptu but intense conversations?

We've all met people like this in real life. Something just keeps you entranced about another person.

• Obviously with females, it's often their looks
• With other guys, guys where you admire their accomplishments, it's the stories they tell, the insights they have.
• With kids - a little kid running around a park can be more interesting than anything else.
• Same with an animals

What if we could learn lessons from all of these instances, and distill them down to a set of protocols, a set of learnable behaviors

That's the promise of pick up.

From a student's perspective, what's easier to learn?

1) Memorize a bunch of stuff, get over your approach anxiety, deliver the stuff, get rejected, and then do it over and over again until you're good at it...if the stuff even works in the first place?

Or

2) "get centered", "get counseling", "be confident", "believe in yourself", "focus your masculine energy" and the one I hate the most "be the best version of yourself"

Most newbs in 2026 prefer "the best version of yourself" - because for the most part it doesn't mean truly radical change. Eat less, lift more, spend more time at the barber.

Traditional Canned Game Pick Up - that requires that you talk to people, pay attention to how you talk, and to how they respond/react.

So guys pick the easy route.

But it's weird to me. Why are you even in the PUA space if this is what you're trying to do.

When I ask guys about this

• Is this the first time you've heard that you should be confident in yourself?
• Is this a new idea?
• Nobody told you to be confident?
• To workout?
• To dress well?
• To get a good haircut and put on some cologne?

What society tells you to do - is the blue pill, by definition.

Most of these Red Pill Mouth Breathers are telling you what society used to tell everyone.

Man Up!.... They're actually Blue Pill guys that just don't like women.

When we know from our own lives and from academic studies, that women, if given a choice, respond to males that are more like them, but then switch on the masculine side when needed.

I.E. the Red Pill, focused on passive external things like "more plates = more dates".

The stoic bad ass with the big muscles and the square jaw that does a manly job, can't compete with the boyish looking bartender when it comes to bagging broads. The first PUA red pill was that we've been sold a lie about what women want.

From a teacher's perspective - what's easier to teach?

1. A script (or set of scripts, or canned routines) that anyone can say and eventually master
2. A set of beliefs about one's self...

Strangely enough, it seems that the script would be easier, but in actuality the "woo woo" stuff of inner game is WAY EASIER TO TEACH.

And it's more profitable. Much like DuoLingo sets up their product so that you can "learn at your own" pace - if you fail to learn - it's on you, not on the teacher.

If you fail to be confident enough, masculine enough, etc - the problem is with you, not with the material - because there is no material. You're the problem.

Tyler had an excuse after The Game to drop "canned routines". Back then cats were talking about having to drop a lot of routines because The Game exposed them, and now everyone knew their tricks. A lot of those guys didn't really seem to understand what the routines did. It was quite a time when you could be a flow chart player.

"I say X, she does Y, I counter with A, She moves with B, then I say C"

Those of us that were better socially adjusted - odd of me to think of myself that way - but turns out I was - realized that you can't memorize stuff for every situation..

A lot of these guys moved away from canned game/super structured game.
Todd did, but at least that first product that he had a bunch of salty YouTube videos that took shots at RSD.
He did say, having a story or a joke that you always use, is a good thing.

As an aside

Guys fall to these types of binaries all the time.

• Day Game or Night Game
• Inner Game vs Outer Game
• Direct vs Indirect
• Canned vs Improvised
• You always pay, either with money or with your time - you always pay, she always wins

I personally don't believe in balance or compromise.

But right tool for the right moment.

All that said, back in the day canned routines were a good way to get started until you developed your own style.

Like "Who Lies more, men or women?" still works 30+ years after Chris Rock said it. A thing that he noticed 30 years ago, practiced in all types of clubs, ends up on his hbo special - and then incorporated into PUA.

Most of those routines work straight up, and the rest need a bit of updating.

A few things like "Make the Ho Say No" (the mindset when you try to open and the chick is just not opening) or "Last minute resistance busters" (get her home, but she's getting cold feet) - need to be understood. These were bordeline back in the day, to me at least. But we gotta recognize what was happening in those situations, so we can prevent them.

Elect WIA for President - I will bring back Routines and Top Hats in 2026!

lol

However society has changed.

• Guys don't approach and girls don't know how to accept an approach.
• Both sides are more in touch with their feelings
• Both sides, now aware of their feelings, don't know what to do about it (much like we all understand late stage capitalism/climate change/the coarsening of pop culture, but we can't do anything about it)

In 2026 - we gotta rethink baseline assumptions about human socialization.

There's plenty of stuff about how messed up boys are, but girls are really messed up.

To bring it back to routines vs "inner game"