What are the least and most statistically successful types of game and location?

[DonKiwi]

PREMISE
One thing, I think, is missing from pickup artistry are statistics. Sure, how you implement game is more important than what type of game and setting you choose but the latters are still important. It's like going to the gym, everyone is different and every body responds differently to train stimulus, but even in weightlifting there are constants that hold signficative value. For example, a 12-15 reps range is the best for hypertrophy, lower reps range are better for strenght while higher reps range are better for endurance. This is just how our fixed human biology works but biology is also an important part of human attraction, not only muscle building, so why wouldn't statistics hold any value?

QUESTION
Back to the question, what do you think are the least and most successful settings/locations for approaching? And what do you think are - on average - the least and most successful types of game?
Success Rate A is defined as number of lays per approach.
Success Rate T is defined as number of lays per unit of time.
Express your answers for both types of success rates.

 

[nolimits]

I like this question man but I'm noticing a trend where everyone is overfocusing on conversion rates lately on this forum. I do not idealize rejection and would avoid it if possible, but obsessing with conversion rates means , in a way, end up 'overfearing' rejection.

Is success defined in number of points per shot in basketball or in number of total succesful shots?

How about in soccer ?

Then why would you define it with a ratio ?

If you focus on the ratio then the best spots are probably niches u specialized on. People who dress like you, share your interests mindsets and values.. those are the girls you will find easier.

But to me an interesting thing to find out would be - what's the place where I can more reliably bang the most women total ?

I know you're not necessarily worrying about the ratio but am convinced it is important to stress out how, in the end, Michael Jordan was the guy who missed the most shots in basketball.


And of course, also the one who made the most.

NoLimits

 

[DonKiwi]

But to me an interesting thing to find out would be - what's the place where I can more relably bang the most women total ?

Interesting answer, I find your way of framing this also useful so I added it to the opener. What do you think is the place where one can more reliably bang the most women total ?

 

[pancakemouse]

Just like the other statistics thread, this is unquantifiable globally because it depends on various factors like male SMV, location, archetypes and ratings of girls he's going after, and more.

I can only speak from my own experience:

Online - 2-3 hours per lay
Daygame - 20 hours per lay
Nightgame - 500+ hours per lay (likely outlier)

Context: self-rating 6.75, muscular with visible abs. Beginner/intermediate daygamer, beginner nightgamer. I approach almost exclusively girls more attractive than me in cold approach.

 

[ulrich]

PREMISE
One thing, I think, is missing from pickup artistry are statistics.

Statistics are more useful if the set of assumptions is shared by all readers.
In other words, if the working model is set and clear… which for seduction it is not.

I can tell you I get laid with 1 out of every 8 girls I approach in daygame.
That statistic is useless if you don’t know how attractive I am, where I live, where I serge and what method I use.

For example, a 12-15 reps range is the best for hypertrophy, lower reps range are better for strenght while higher reps range are better for endurance. This is just how our fixed human biology works but biology is also an important part of human attraction, not only muscle building, so why wouldn't statistics hold any value?

This is exactly what I am talking about. The 12-15 reps for hypertrophy is not a universal agreement.

I have found much more success with 5-8 and many experts would side with this model.

QUESTION
Back to the question, what do you think are the least and most successful settings/locations for approaching? And what do you think are - on average - the least and most successful types of game?
Success Rate A is defined as number of lays per approach.
Success Rate T is defined as number of lays per unit of time.
Express your answers for both types of success rates.

Still, I would give you my opinion.

Higher success rate in terms of pussy vs time or pussy vs approach is online game (if you’re counting approach = start conversation)

I can probably get 1 lay per 8 approaches or 1 lay per 3.5 hours total investment and I am not even advanced (I am handsome, though).

That being said, the quality of girls in apps is not the greatest. I don’t do online anymore for that reason.

 

[nolimits]

I would also add that if it's true that daygame may seem to take up more time (15-20 hours a week to bang a couple girls a week ), in the end, everything worth achieving takes time.

I am more worried about how well something fits my schedule and how much does it make me grow as a person, than how good of a ratio it has or how much minutes it makes me gain.

While night game teaches you quite a bit, the courage and level of skill you build with daygame transfers really well in other areas of life and kind of makes the rest of your life easier by comparison - if you see what I mean.

Plus, let's say you hit the streets for 2 hours a day.

You burn calories, you build courage and you are sober.

At night, you are forced to sacrifice a moment you could be using to hang out with friends, or on dates. You are likely to drink alcohool and sleep less, etc.

AND it still takes time. Probably the same 2 hours.

Now if you have a harem of male friends - as I like to define it - and you can go out with a different friend every night, that's a different story. It makes the whole thing way more fun then day game.

But while in the process of building a huge friend harem I do tend to prefere day game.

 

[Teevster]

I always had most success in Gay bars/clubs - that is, the type that is heterofriendly: venues that let in girls. I have had sex with some of the hottest girls from those venues and approaching is a piece of cake in there. There are other challenges though but those tend to be challenges I prefer dealing with, such as tons of shittests ("are you sure you are not gay"), wildcards (annoying gay friends) and so on.

But it is by far the easiest and most efficient way to get laid. Sadly where I currently live there aren't many great venues and I have been banned from 2 of them after pulling a bit too often from them (same bouncer, who got jealous because I shagged a girl he liked - decided to ban me on a false pretext that I was selling drugs...). But if I move to another city I for sure will hit the gay venues hard.

Best,
Teevster

 

[trashKENNUT]

But it is by far the easiest and most efficient way to get laid. Sadly where I currently live there aren't many great venues and I have been banned from 2 of them after pulling a bit too often from them (same bouncer, who got jealous because I shagged a girl he liked - decided to ban me on a false pretext that I was selling drugs...).

Right... Bouncers can be bullshit.

z@c+

 

[pancakemouse]

I always had most success in Gay bars/clubs - that is, the type that is heterofriendly: venues that let in girls. I have had sex with some of the hottest girls from those venues and approaching is a piece of cake in there. There are other challenges though but those tend to be challenges I prefer dealing with, such as tons of shittests ("are you sure you are not gay"), wildcards (annoying gay friends) and so on.

But it is by far the easiest and most efficient way to get laid. Sadly where I currently live there aren't many great venues and I have been banned from 2 of them after pulling a bit too often from them (same bouncer, who got jealous because I shagged a girl he liked - decided to ban me on a false pretext that I was selling drugs...). But if I move to another city I for sure will hit the gay venues hard.

Best,
Teevster

I wonder if this is a European thing. Gay venues in the US have trash quality women, in my experience.

I would also add that if it's true that daygame may seem to take up more time (15-20 hours a week to bang a couple girls a week ), in the end, everything worth achieving takes time.

I am more worried about how well something fits my schedule and how much does it make me grow as a person, than how good of a ratio it has or how much minutes it makes me gain.

While night game teaches you quite a bit, the courage and level of skill you build with daygame transfers really well in other areas of life and kind of makes the rest of your life easier by comparison - if you see what I mean.

Plus, let's say you hit the streets for 2 hours a day.

You burn calories, you build courage and you are sober.

At night, you are forced to sacrifice a moment you could be using to hang out with friends, or on dates. You are likely to drink alcohool and sleep less, etc.

AND it still takes time. Probably the same 2 hours.

Now if you have a harem of male friends - as I like to define it - and you can go out with a different friend every night, that's a different story. It makes the whole thing way more fun then day game.

But while in the process of building a huge friend harem I do tend to prefere day game.

Well said. I gladly do daygame nowadays even though Tinder is 5x more efficient for me. My game is getting much better with daygame than it did with years of Tinder.

 

[Chase]

I wonder if this is a European thing. Gay venues in the US have trash quality women, in my experience.

Every mixed gay/straight venue I've frequented in the US has basically this cast of characters:

1. Gay dudes
2. Trannies
3. Trashy fat/ugly girls
4. Super sluts
5. Hot girls trying to escape from the drunk dude fest in other venues

I was never able to find a wing to go with me consistently to these venues, because every guy I took hated them. Too many fat/ugly/trashy girls, too many gay guys, they just didn't like them.

Thing is these places are known as meet markets, and the girls who go to them go there knowing that's what they are, and are very receptive... meanwhile most guys won't go to them because they don't feel comfortable.

So assuming you are able to just ignore the fat/ugly/trashy girls, and not get catfished by the trannies, there is basically always going to be some cool hot girl or some sexy slutty chick who is open to your approach.

IME most guys in night game fall prey to the cheerleader effect... they all congregate to the same handful of venues where a bunch of hot-looking girls are all gathered together. They see those venues and say, "Whoa, what a great venue, look at all the hotties!" then go there and strike out with 10-15 girls and call it a night, then come back there the next night and strike out again. The girls are there because there is safety in numbers and they love that validation pump of all the guys hitting on them whom they then reject. The guys go there because they've been dazzled by the quantity of good-looking girls. These venues are generally pretty to very tough to pick up in.

Guys keep going to them despite striking out over and over again, however, because they cannot get past that cognitive bias that says "venue with most hot girls = venue with best odds to lay a hot girl", and reach the point where they realize "venue with the most receptive girls, that also has some quantity of hot girls, even if the proportion is not high = venue with the best odds to lay a hot girl."

Chase

 

[trashKENNUT]

The girls are there because there is safety in numbers and they love that validation pump of all the guys hitting on them whom they then reject. The guys go there because they've been dazzled by the quantity of good-looking girls. These venues are generally pretty to very tough to pick up in.

Guys keep going to them despite striking out over and over again, however, because they cannot get past that cognitive bias that says "venue with most hot girls = venue with best odds to lay a hot girl", and reach the point where they realize "venue with the most receptive girls, that also has some quantity of hot girls, even if the proportion is not high = venue with the best odds to lay a hot girl."

Chase

Someone in the forums noted that females (He use the word 'Girl', not female) today are not as sophisticated socially as they think they are. And that they get 'dismantled' when they are put in public social environments.

I hope someone links the exact quote/excerpt

He also ask the question.
I am paraphrasing his question. Not his words:
"Why are people lazy to go out?"

My thoughts on his question is humans are zero risk, huge rewards. Thus, the validation pump from TikTok, make it seems like you are the prize when you are not the prize.

and that prize perception moves.

An example of PERCEPTION moving:
Im considered leftwing maniac in Asia.
And super leftwing maniac to Muslims in Asia and that even is spread into whether Singapore Muslim or Indonesia Muslim or Malaysia Muslim But a dark red republican to ordinary Democrat Americans

and definitely a 'white supremacy' to far left Americans even when I'm brown in skin.

And yea... That's where all the problem is and I hope Girlschase is one of THE PLATFORMS in the next decade, where I can play a part in and help bridge people.

z@c+

 

[Chase]

@ZacAdam,

My thoughts on his question is humans are zero risk, huge rewards. Thus, the validation pump from TikTok, make it seems like you are the prize when you are not the prize.

and that prize perception moves.

It's a big part of the decline in nightlife, I suspect.

There's a two-pronged attack on nightlife's raison d'être:

1. Nightlife provides women validation. But now they can just get that on TikTok or Instagram
   
   
2. Nightlife provides opportunities to hook up. But now they can just get that on Tinder / Bumble / Hinge

Some chunk of both the validation hounds and the horny girls simply go on apps rather than go out.

I don't think it's even a conscious thing usually. The girl is just sitting there, going, "I really want to feel validated right now," and she thinks about taking a shower and going out to the club, but then she thinks, "Let me just go on TikTok."

Or she's feeling horny, and she thinks about calling up her girls to see if someone wants to go to the club, then she thinks, "Let me just see what matches I have on Tinder."

But there is still always a certain portion of women (people) who like to go out, and prefer to be outside, and do things socially. So those people will still go out anyway. And it is not uncommon for people to get disgusted with digital stuff and go on a digital detox, at which point then they will go out. Or she may have a pushy friend or roommate who drags her out, when she might otherwise have just sat around in a haze staring at her phone. So you still get people going out. It is just less, and because most of them go out less often individually, they also are not as socially developed.

I wish they had data on this, but I bet if you did a random sample of nightlife attendees in, say, 2005, and another one in 2022, you would find a higher proportion of extraverts in nightlife in 2022, because extraverts really just want and need that high fidelity in-person interaction. Introverts have an easy escape hatch now... they can just do some digital socializing, and check off the socialization box for the day. Not even any need for small talk! It's the introvert's dream!

Chase

 

[Skills]

Well said. I gladly do daygame nowadays even though Tinder is 5x more efficient for me. My game is getting much better with daygame than it did with years of Tinder.

^ yeah cause once you figure out and angle is always the same.... with other games there is a lot of other factors and wildcards...

 

[James Cruse]

Just like the other statistics thread, this is unquantifiable globally because it depends on various factors like male SMV, location, archetypes and ratings of girls he's going after, and more.

I can only speak from my own experience:

Online - 2-3 hours per lay
Daygame - 20 hours per lay
Nightgame - 500+ hours per lay (likely outlier)

Context: self-rating 6.75, muscular with visible abs. Beginner/intermediate daygamer, beginner nightgamer. I approach almost exclusively girls more attractive than me in cold approach.

I’m guessing this means you do online game almost exclusively.
This would explain why alot of your posts have a tone of frustration.

Daygame should certainly not take that many hours, unless you’re counting alot of downtime between each approach.
If you’re looking at the actual time interacting with women only, far too much.

I also don’t believe 3 hours for online game - that means you could be swiping for awhile every night and every second or third night you pulled.
But you’re not going to pull every girl you go on a date with, so you need to count the time spent on dates in time invested per/online game pull. At 3 hours, that means you’re pulling every second or third night, if you put in 60-90 mins of swiping & messaging per night - this I doubt very much.
Realistically, from my experience, night game is the lowest time spent per lay, far lower than online game and even lower than daygame.
It very rarely takes approaching 7 or less girls - sometimes up to 15, if I’m tired or “off”.
Can you run us through what you’re general method in all three game areas that you mentioned?

 

[James Cruse]

I like this question man but I'm noticing a trend where everyone is overfocusing on conversion rates lately on this forum. I do not idealize rejection and would avoid it if possible, but obsessing with conversion rates means , in a way, end up 'overfearing' rejection.

Is success defined in number of points per shot in basketball or in number of total succesful shots?

How about in soccer ?

Then why would you define it with a ratio ?

If you focus on the ratio then the best spots are probably niches u specialized on. People who dress like you, share your interests mindsets and values.. those are the girls you will find easier.

But to me an interesting thing to find out would be - what's the place where I can more reliably bang the most women total ?

I know you're not necessarily worrying about the ratio but am convinced it is important to stress out how, in the end, Michael Jordan was the guy who missed the most shots in basketball.


And of course, also the one who made the most.

NoLimits

I can speak from my own thoughts and experience, I want to know conversion rates for the following reasons:

1. Which seduction method(s) have the best conversion rate (meet to lay ratio) and why?
2. It’s not about avoiding rejection - it’s about saving our most precious resource: TIME.

We all know we don’t like rejection but we also know rejection is part of pickup and seduction, that’s a given.

This is such a simple idea, and people here are trying to strawman others for asking about their conversion.
I suspect the reason people keep shaming guys here for asking the question or trying to sidestep the question of conversion really don’t want people to know how much time they spend NOT converting (as if it doesn’t matter - it does) or just don’t approach very often and don’t want to reveal that.

I think the discussion about conversion and numbers is a VERY VALID enquiry regarding seduction methods.

If a method doesn’t convert - people should drop it and move on to a new seduction method(s) that will convert. Many guys here are using a shitty method that doesn’t convert and need to change their method to convert.

I liken the idea to sales - if I’m going to 20 sales appointments per week and I use a particular method and I only convert one sale per week - yes it’s a win and I get paid for it. BUT it’s not going to lead to me being wealthy or give me alot of additional options financially.
So then I move onto another method that nets me (consistantly) 4-5 sales out of 20. Which is very good, but not great.
Then I move onto a method that allows me to close 9-10 sales per week out of 20 - with additional referrals and returning customers - now that’s MUCH better sales method that will lead me to far more success and wealth. This method will allow me to get paid more than double the money for the same amount of TIME (and usually effort).

The goal here is that people are trying to be smarter seducers, which is what we should all aim for.

This is like what I said above - I stopped using dating apps here because the Return on Investment (ROI) for the time I was spending was very low in amount and very low quality, therefore I discovered it wasn’t a good use of my time, energy or effort.

I know there is some model looking guys that I know, where apps are ideal for them - they can swipe for an hour per day and have dates lined up for 3-4 nights that week with attractive women just coming directly over to their house and they can do this swiping while eating their lunch.
But those guys look like models. Would they have the same ROI from daygame - definately not. From nightclubs? Probably not either. Would the quality from daygame be better? Yes. Nightclubs? Maybe

So I think we should all keep in mind our conversion rates and discuss them openly in relation to our actions, rather than shaming people here.

 

[James Cruse]

@ZacAdam,



It's a big part of the decline in nightlife, I suspect.

There's a two-pronged attack on nightlife's raison d'être:

1. Nightlife provides women validation. But now they can just get that on TikTok or Instagram
   
   
2. Nightlife provides opportunities to hook up. But now they can just get that on Tinder / Bumble / Hinge

Some chunk of both the validation hounds and the horny girls simply go on apps rather than go out.

I don't think it's even a conscious thing usually. The girl is just sitting there, going, "I really want to feel validated right now," and she thinks about taking a shower and going out to the club, but then she thinks, "Let me just go on TikTok."

Or she's feeling horny, and she thinks about calling up her girls to see if someone wants to go to the club, then she thinks, "Let me just see what matches I have on Tinder."

But there is still always a certain portion of women (people) who like to go out, and prefer to be outside, and do things socially. So those people will still go out anyway. And it is not uncommon for people to get disgusted with digital stuff and go on a digital detox, at which point then they will go out. Or she may have a pushy friend or roommate who drags her out, when she might otherwise have just sat around in a haze staring at her phone. So you still get people going out. It is just less, and because most of them go out less often individually, they also are not as socially developed.

I wish they had data on this, but I bet if you did a random sample of nightlife attendees in, say, 2005, and another one in 2022, you would find a higher proportion of extraverts in nightlife in 2022, because extraverts really just want and need that high fidelity in-person interaction. Introverts have an easy escape hatch now... they can just do some digital socializing, and check off the socialization box for the day. Not even any need for small talk! It's the introvert's dream!

Chase

I totally agree with this.

This is also the exact reason why I believe game has become more difficult since 2005-2012, as I was discussing in the other post.

Introvert women don’t need to go out of their house or to clubs to get validation from men = seducers don’t get to meet them during the day/at nightclubs.

Horny girls don’t need to leave their house to find a guy to have sex with; they just go on dating apps for a non-judgemental anonymous hookup = seducers don’t get to meet them at events/parties/clubs

Therefore, the dating landscape has gotten worse for us.

 

[ulrich]

This is such a simple idea, and people here are trying to strawman others for asking about their conversion.
I suspect the reason people keep shaming guys here for asking the question or trying to sidestep the question of conversion really don’t want people to know how much time they spend NOT converting (as if it doesn’t matter - it does) or just don’t approach very often and don’t want to reveal that.

I can’t talk for all people here but I don’t think we are trying to shame anyone for trying to improve conversion rate.

We are trying to advice that creating a “statistically optimal” path of success is going to lead inexperienced guys to use techniques that don’t fit their situations and don’t go well together.

Imagine trying to play chess following the “statistically correct” moves. The moment your rival takes you to unfamiliar territory, you’re toast.
There’s simply no substitute to learning the strategy if you want to win such game.

Statistics can lead to incorrect conclusions if the observer is not experienced enough in the field to correctly interpret them.
The average human has half a penis, for example.

 

[James Cruse]

I can’t talk for all people here but I don’t think we are trying to shame anyone for trying to improve conversion rate.

We are trying to advice that creating a “statistically optimal” path of success is going to lead inexperienced guys to use techniques that don’t fit their situations and don’t go well together.

Imagine trying to play chess following the “statistically correct” moves. The moment your rival takes you to unfamiliar territory, you’re toast.
There’s simply no substitute to learning the strategy if you want to win such game.

Statistics can lead to incorrect conclusions if the observer is not experienced enough in the field to correctly interpret them.
The average human has half a penis, for example.

Thanks for the reply, it’s appreciated.
However, this is another strawman.

Who here mentioned “statistically optimal”? No-one said that.
Who here said anyone here is a beginner?

There are overarching seduction methods that are more successful than others, if followed.

You’re essentially saying, “there’s so many methods and so many things you can do in an interaction, that one seduction method can never be compared against another, especially when it comes to conversion rates, so it’s all too hard and don’t bother - let’s talk about something else”.

It’s just muddying the water to avoid a possible comparison.

People should be tracking their ROI and should ideally be changing their methods if they’re unhappy with results of the method. I don’t think this is that controversial.

 

[ulrich]

Who here said anyone here is a beginner?

Hundreds if not thousands of guys reading these forums are beginners.

You’re essentially saying, “there’s so many methods and so many things you can do in an interaction, that one seduction method can never be compared against another, especially when it comes to conversion rates, so it’s all too hard and don’t bother - let’s talk about something else”.

Now, you’re creating the strawman.

What I’m saying is “people are going to use any statistical list to base their decisions instead of calibrating to their real scenarios” and “beginners won’t be able to distinguish an expertly curated list from a defective one”.

Some years ago, I used to play a competitive video game called League of Legends where two teams of five players each choose charactes from a pool of over 100 champions.
Many opponents tended to base their character decision on statistical “counter lists” instead of understanding the needs of their team which led to them losing.

Calibration > Statistical models

 

[James Cruse]

Hundreds if not thousands of guys reading these forums are beginners.



Now, you’re creating the strawman.

What I’m saying is “people are going to use any statistical list to base their decisions instead of calibrating to their real scenarios” and “beginners won’t be able to distinguish an expertly curated list from a defective one”.

Some years ago, I used to play a competitive video game called League of Legends where two teams of five players each choose charactes from a pool of over 100 champions.
Many opponents tended to base their character decision on statistical “counter lists” instead of understanding the needs of their team which led to them losing.

Calibration > Statistical models

This is still a strawman - you keep bringing up “statistical models” - this is not relevant to this discussion nor was it brought up by anyone here at any time.

You’re trying to frame this as, “people will just use one method of seduction and just bulldoze some girl with this method mindlessly rather than calibrate” - brother that’s a strawman.

Who the hell said using a seduction method didn’t include calibration? Just LOL!

If you’re not calibrating from their response by reading their cues and tone, then no seduction methods will work well at all, no matter what. It would be mindless ploughing like a speeg.
Everyone here is generally calibrating at least abit, if not alot. The only people that wouldn’t be would be genuinely on the spectrum.

So what you’re saying above is - “methods shouldn’t be compared because they don’t include any calibration and you need calibration so therefore no methods should be compared.”

I think here we can assume that everyone is calibrating to the best of their ability in every interaction they go into, so it really doesn’t need to be said here.

So what you said above is moot here mate.

What method do you use and what is your approach to lay ratio for daygame and night game?