Red Pill TheoryDirect Game Vs. Indirect Game - Which Is Better? (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by Aghayden

I walk up to a cute blonde girl at the bar and say, “Hey, would you like to have sex?” She responds­, “Well, I don't really know you. What’s your name?” We talk for over an hour at the bar until she says, “Hey, would you like to get a drink back at my place?” I used the most direct pickup line imaginable, and it worked.

Of course, the other 50 times I asked women to have sex with me right off the open, it didn’t go quite so well.

1 out of 50 isn’t that bad – you could easily approach that many women in a single weekend. But, it goes without saying that you’d have a better ‘batting average’ if you used an indirect opener like, “Hey, do I look like a drug dealer?”

Asking, “Would you like to have sex?” Is an exaggeration of what direct game really looks like, but it does show that direct game can work.

The million-dollar question, though, is whether direct game is more effective than indirect game.

I’ve heavily experimented with both types of game, and I have a satisfying answer to the question, “Which is better, direct game or indirect game?”


Direct Game: The Advantages


In dating, women rarely make the first move. So, you will miss countless opportunities unless you lead your interactions with women towards something sexual (https://redpilltheory.com/2018/07/27/how-to-pull-a-girl-on-a-night-out/).

For example, when I was 19, I brought a beautiful girl into my bedroom for the first time. She gave me a sensual full-body massage.

Obviously, she wanted me to fuck her. But I was so afraid of rejection that I didn’t make a move. The next morning, she said, “That’s not what I was expecting to happen.” I never saw her again.

If I had been direct in my interest with that girl, we absolutely would have had sex. That’s the advantage to using direct game: when a girl does like you, you will make something happen.

Truth is, most men miss countless opportunities with women simply because they never make a bold move.

The basic strategy behind direct game is to let the girl know that you are attracted to her (I.E. “You’re very attractive.” If she reciprocates your interest, you’ve both consciously agreed that the nature of your relationship is sexual.

Direct game will instantly weed out the girls who aren’t interested in you. But in many cases, nothing was going to happen with them anyway, so you’re just saving time.

A certain percentage of the women you meet will have a strong natural attraction for you. Being direct with these women can be an effective, no-bullshit dating strategy.

I wish I had understood the merits of direct game in my teens. I missed dozens (if not hundreds) of opportunities with women because I just didn’t make my interest clear.


The Disadvantages of Direct Game


Direct game works well on “yes girls” (women who have consciously decided they’re attracted to you), and it saves time with “no girls” (women who have consciously decided they’re not interested in you).

But, there is a problem with direct game – it forces women to make a snap decision about you. Many women will be fence sitters at first: they’re not sure if they’re interested in you (these are also known as “maybe girls”).

If a girl isn’t sure whether she likes you, and you are direct with her, she’s most likely going to reject you – because that’s the safer option.

Direct game will help you capitalize on opportunities with “yes girls”, but it will also cause you to miss opportunities with “maybe girls”.


The Pros and Cons of Indirect Game


Indirect game allows you to fly “under the radar” because you’re leaving room for the girl to doubt whether you’re interested in her.

Using indirect game allows you to cultivate attraction with women who at first have a lukewarm response to you. Once a “maybe girl” realizes your funny, confident, and charismatic, she’s going to become a “yes girl”.

Most of the beautiful women you meet are going to be “no girls” or “maybe girls”. Indirect game gives you the opportunity to date some of those women.

Indirect game also has an emotional appeal because it allows you to avoid rejection. If you tell a girl, “Hey, I think you’re beautiful, would you like to get coffee sometime?” She might reject you bluntly, (I.E. “Sorry, I’m not interested.”)

Whereas, if you approached her indirectly, she would have no reason to reject you. She’ll eventually say something like, “Oh, I have to go find my friends.” But that doesn’t have the same sting as the rejections you’ll get when you’re direct.

Ultimately though, rejection is unavoidable, and the best way to deal with it is to expose yourself to rejection until you become numb to it. One of the disadvantages of indirect game is that it doesn’t teach you to face rejection head on.


The Verdict: Direct Game Vs. Indirect Game


Direct game is a useful tool for getting some experience under your belt. If you’re an aspiring Casanova, direct game can help you make the most of your opportunities with “yes girls”.

Hypothetically, though, you can attract more women with indirect game, but to pull that off you must be comfortable with escalating your interactions sexually. For most guys that’s hard, making a move puts us in a vulnerable position. So, even when we think a girl likes us, we tend to play it safe (and ultimately, nothing happens with her).

Direct game can teach you to stop playing it safe, to take your interactions with women as far as they can possibly go. Yes, most women will reject you when you use direct game, but not all women will. And the women who respond positively to direct game will help you become confident in your sexuality.

Once you’ve gotten some success with direct game (I.E. you’ve hooked up with a few girls), then, you can learn indirect game so that you can start attracting “maybe girls”.

But if you try indirect game before you’re good at being direct, it’s very likely that you’re going to miss many opportunities with “yes girls” (I speak from experience).

If you’re a guy who gets nervous about leaning in to kiss a girl for the first time, or you have trouble escalating sexually when you’re alone with a girl, or you’re a guy who ends up in the ‘friend zone’ with women – then you should learn direct game, first.

Once you’re comfortable with being direct, then, you can benefit from learning and practicing indirect game.

Put simply, direct game is the best tool for learning how to attract women when you’re inexperienced. But indirect game is the best way to attract women when you’ve had a decent number of successes with women in the past.

[–]BobbyPeru 82 points83 points  (2 children)

I’ve found stages to be best, and telling instead of asking.

For example, the first stage might be, “hey, let’s go grab some lunch.”

The second stage might be, hey let’s just pick up lunch and eat it at my place... etc

This has actually helped me Day game and close same day.

[–]red_philosopher 51 points52 points  (1 child)

Plausible deniability and leadership in one. Not bad.

[–]BobbyPeru 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Yes, good description. BTW, one of the stages was, “hey, let’s go make out on the couch and see how that feels.” I was genuinely curious to see what it would feel like to make out with her, so I was honest. Guys make it too complex. Often, the simple truth about your thoughts is best.

[–]Endorsed Contributorsadomasochrist 44 points45 points  (5 children)

90% of game is female sub-communication the other 10% is escalation which is essentially a congruence test.

Overt game is mostly reserved for ChadTC. If you're not in the position to be turning women away in droves then stick with indirect.

In the same vein if a woman is receptive at 1AM indirect game is going to signal you're not ready or congruent. Just tell her you're ready to leave and play Monopoly at home together. Still maintain plausible deniability unless you're again ChadTC.

Understand your tools, use them both and keep them sharp.

[–][deleted]  (4 children)


    [–]Da_RectumWrecker 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Day game is the easiest! It's an old PUA trick, but you have to use body language when people are in a hurry. I like to "lean out" when I'm interacting with people who are in a hurry because it implies that I'm also in a hurry and I won't take much of their time. No one wants to stop what they're doing to talk to some rando. What I mean by "leaning out" is that I put my weight on my foot furthest away from the girl, and I never really turn completely to face her. I like to imagine that I just stopped mid stride and am about to leave at any second. Or you could imagine that you're in a convo that you just can't be bothered with and you're trying to subtly show the other person that you want to leave.

    I will usually say something along the lines of "I have somewhere to be, but could I have your number so we could chat later?" and then just leave when she gives it to you. Then I've bought myself some time to think of something to say and I text logistics from there.

    [–]Endorsed Contributorsadomasochrist 7 points8 points  (2 children)

    The whole purpose of indirect game is that you are not violating the person's ability to continue on with their day, there is plausible deniability and also you're leaving open the option of her terminating the discussion.

    You're in a store selling cassette tapes and she picks up ACDC and you compliment her on her taste in rap music, she laughs at you and is about to say something and you say of course you're joking and open a conversation about music. If she's receptive you see if there's a spark. If she seems like she's being interrupted you just move right on.

    As opposed to direct game where you make it subtly obvious that you are interested in her, she's going to probably blow you out unless you're 910 Chad TC hot.

    This is also why the incel types get so worked up about the conversations where trolls use male models to talk to women online. If you're a legit 10 male, top 1% physically, you can tell women you're a convicted child rapist and a not insignificant number of them will ignore it, just like you'd ignore the woman who murdered her ex-husband and is out on parole for a quick bang.

    So if you're that guy, do whatever, whenever, wherever. Otherwise you have to wait for a strong IOI. Something like "oh my god, I should give you my number" or grabbing your arm etc.

    But here's the real red pill truth here. Day game has abysmal numbers. You pretty much need to be in the position to approach all the time because your job allows it. Otherwise you're better served going to the bar, dancing lessons etc. depending on whether or not you're looking for a ONS or a GF.

    [–]markinsinz7 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    You're right day game is abysmal especially because there's no context for the girl to really meet u. At best u just had a good chat in the middle of the street/park/whatever.

    But these days they need to look at ur instagram see what ur SMV is and all that jazz. As for gf I don't know how people can date these days knowing during initial stages their gf was fuckin some other dude while fuckin this dude as well

    [–]Endorsed Contributorsadomasochrist 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    No one needs to know shit. You set the terms of the game. If your area code is 123 "123 and the rest?" You take her number and work from there. If she even hesitates to give you her number you throw ONE hail mary, that's it.

    I do in a way agree with Mark Manson here that it's "fuck yes" or forget it. If you don't have enough fuck yes to work from, work on you, not your game.

    Grinding contacts might have worked 15-20 years ago but those days are long gone. There's a mile long list of potential suitors and no need for you to put yourself in that line, but also you've got to have something going for you that puts you in a different camp.

    For most women, I'd say just having a pair of balls puts you ahead of 80% of guys.

    [–]DareyFathom 26 points27 points  (3 children)

    You should be able to apply both, but frankly direct game is more limited IMO. Particularly when interacting with higher quality women that have undoubtedly encountered a lot of game.

    [–]call_in_the_cavalry 1 point2 points  (2 children)

    I agree, direct game can also make ASD more likely to happen.

    [–]TXROADWARRIOR 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Yo where can I learn what all the acronyms mean?

    [–]KNTEnlightened 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    In the sidebar, under Glossary of Terms and Acronyms (2015). If on mobile, check community info.

    [–]Esaulph 24 points25 points  (0 children)

    I've always been the "push and pull type". Being direct is very useful because it can also show a person your confidence, and which may also show dominance -- girls are attracted to that.

    And yet, if you're indirect, it gets them thinking, makes them curious, girls love mystery, and once you get into a transition of indirect to direct, you're playing the game til you realize now you're now the one in control.

    Mixing it up does bring a big effect.

    [–]jesper_lundqvist 20 points21 points  (6 children)

    I don't think direct game and indirect game is the right way to think about it except for some very specific circumstances. For direct game: a guy who is direct with a woman about sex is the equivalent of a woman who is direct with a guy about relationships. Talk of either provokes an anxiety in men and women about locking themselves into a bad decision. That's why women have last minute resistance about sex and also why men have fear of commitment to a relationship (and these two fears are seldom the other way around). A certain level of plausible deniability is needed to keep the doors open, which is why women get spooked out by the idea of going back "for sex" but have no hesitation in joining a guy "for a nightcap" (this is also why explicitly asking for a woman's consent is such a bad idea despite what feminists will tell you; aside from how creepy women find indecision it also makes them feel like they are forced to make a decision they can't back out of).

    Following directly on from this, indirect game poses its own problems. The unwillingness to make a move is a manifestation of indecisiveness and playing it safe makes women feel as if they are making the decision for you, which once again makes them feel uneasy (this is of course very different from when a girl flat out wants you and makes a move despite your lack of interest). Women are very sensitive to subconscious intent and social cues and can tell when a guy is sexually interested in her but keeps making contrived non-sexual conversation, the kind that would have fizzled out long ago with anyone else. This mismatch between intentions and actions makes him difficult to read, which is why she feels creeped out.

    Of course, these are the extremes of direct and indirect behaviour, but what I'm trying to hammer home is that in effective game, the direct and indirect components are inseparable from each other. I would say you have to be "directly indirect" with women: making and holding eye contact with a girl you haven't spoken to yet isn't outright saying, "I want to have sex with you," but it puts it on the table. If you brush her hair behind her ear when you're alone, she knows you're about to kiss her. If you ask her if she has plans for the rest of the night, you're giving her a low-pressure way to tell you if she's down-to-fuck or not. As is so often said on this board, pay attention to actions, not words.

    [–]Dickinson_Burns 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    quality, never though about the whole sex/relationship thing.

    But then, how does one approach? I've been cold approaching a lot on campus (since I don't really meet attractive women otherwise) and it feels a bit bizarre, if not impossible, to try and get on a date with her... without setting the tone for a date/asking her out? What am I missing? It seems women read this really clearly (good), and decide fairly quickly whether or not they want to date me (good?), which seems convenient given that I will otherwise never see them again.

    [–]jesper_lundqvist 2 points3 points  (3 children)

    Chris Rock said when the average guy talks to a girl he finds attractive, any sentence he said can be replaced with, "Want some dick?" That sums up about 99% of cold approaches and why they fail. The intent is clear from the outset even though neither party explicitly acknowledges it. Women don't so much want the dick as much as the man who's attached to it, which is why women screen men through shit tests and the like. There's tons of thirsty guys that have nothing to offer her, so why would she assume this random stranger is any different?

    Of course, we know that girls hook up with random strangers, but what's important is the context. Holding eye contact is a way of telling which girls find you attractive and are open to you approaching them (which saves you the bother of getting shot down). If you are both in the same place for a reason (such as a hobby or it's a friend's party), then you can approach at will because you have a reason to talk to her other than getting her into bed (which takes away suspicions about your motives, having to reject you, etc).

    I do occasionally "cold approach" people (I mean where I say something to a stranger out of the blue) but I keep it to a throwaway remark or two and see if they respond in kind (if they don't, I leave them be). If you make a bit of casual conversational unconditionally (as in no hidden motives, just doing it for fun), people do sometimes join in because there's no pressure. The problem is that cold approaching girls with the hopes of getting their number is not unconditional and they can sense it a mile away, which is why they try and extricate themselves as quickly as possible if they don't find you attractive.

    [–]hb8only 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    The problem is that cold approaching girls with the hopes of getting their number is not unconditional and they can sense it a mile away, which is why they try and extricate themselves as quickly as possible if they don't find you attractive.

    why is that a problem??? she can piss off fast when not interested but stay longer when is - great indicator for us...

    [–]jesper_lundqvist 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Because the approach itself is what drives them off. Any girl who stays around when you are that direct is clearly attracted to you so that is a "great indicator" as you say, but it is also an extremely inefficient way of picking up girls. The PUA scene is full of guys who have undergone reams and reams of rejections and come out with very little to show for it. Their problem is clearly goes beyond screening.

    [–]hb8only 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    hmm.. I will stick to indirect when no IOIs are received...

    [–]NormalAndy 18 points19 points  (0 children)

    Leading implies taking responsibility and many/ most people are shit scared of being blamed for anything. Asking her what she wants is also pretty stupid when it's well known that women are usually dreadful decision makers.

    Have the courage to take charge and have the courage to not give a fuck when it doesn't work.

    I must confess I don't really go for all this machiavellian shit anymore. I used to try to be smart and sneaky- was always having to check that I'd covered my tracks properly over lying and it was just apain in the ass. It's useful skill to have but I would go for the straight shot wherever possible - for simplicity's sake. But sometimes there is that opportunity that just needs taking anyway...

    [–]Endorsed ContributorWe_Are_Legion 14 points15 points  (5 children)

    Direct and Indirect isn't the differentiator. Being true to your intentions is. Fearlessly congruent.

    If you truly just want to tear her clothes off and have sex with HER right then, and you honestly can't contain yourself, then yeah, sure, ask her to have sex with you. And watch how it flows out when its honest, it'll just feel right. And from her end, it is always going to be very attractive. She might say yes, or no. But staying honest and saying what you're REALLY thinking is going to be attractive. The reasoning is that not only are you a seriously impressive dude for having the guts to put your balls on the chopping block, but the way you will do it when you've stopped thinking and just started honestly acting on your inner being, is just infectious. Its going to be new, exciting, fun and just something she wants to be a part of.

    She might still say no, to be sure. But in my experience, 9 out of 10 women will still revel in the attention of such a man. They will keep that conversation going as long as they can. They will laugh, feign shock and disgust but will always remain intensely engaged with the idea of talking to you.

    But you will still get rejected.

    This is however, the superior way to act. Why?

    • 1) It prevents wasting time.
    • 2) When you're acting according to your true intentions in that very second, you are always going to have fun, by definition.
    • 3) All women are attracted to this sort of behaviour. They may not always rationally like what you've just said or done but you can tell via tone of voice, body language, expressions, that she's intrigued and attracted.
    • 4) It prevents her manipulating you.
    • 5) See my edit. It automatically passes you in all congruence tests.

    Number 4 is the true game-changer though.

    When I approach women while fearlessly displaying my intentions clearly and honestly, it prevents anyway for her to manipulate me. How? Manipulation is a two-way street. When I try to be a gentleman and become friends with her first before stating my interest, or even if I'm more forward than that, and say to her "Can I buy you a drink?" I am creating a covert contract of sorts. I don't want to buy her a drink. I don't want to be her friend. I actually want to talk and flirt with her, I'm just hoping to manipulate her chance of reciprocating by the promise of a drink or a long friendship. Women are masters of manipulation and usually subconsciously, they realize what you're doing and use it as leverage over you. They realize that they're in control. And they use it to waste your time and shit-test you because they know that you're invested in them staying around.

    (Its important to understand many shit-tests are just women breaking rapport when you've shown you've become emotionally invested, just to see if you'll squirm. They're calling your bluff, seeing how desperate you are. People rooted in their own intentions and FUN are not only high status, but not terribly emotionally invested in her, giving her little room to manipulate you.)

    So, instead of saying "Can I buy you a drink?", follow your intention, whatever it is. This is something only you can tell, and it requires present moment awareness. Lets say, my intention is to practice my approach game. In this case, I would literally go up to her and say "Hi, can I practice flirting with you for 10 seconds? I'm following this guide online on how to pick up chicks."

    It will work. Trust me. As long as you're true to your intentions and congruent, your behaviour will attractive no matter what you say. And there is no way she can manipulate you based off of that. Its just so straight-forward. No wiggle room for her to operate.

    But sometimes circumstances do not permit success even for attractive behaviour. In that case, don't worry. What's the worst she could say? "No"? So what. You saved your time and you had fun. On to the next item in your intentions. If I'm really rooted in present moment awareness, I might perceive I want to keep playing. So I"ll say, "OK, so its a no. But can I practice my negotiation tactics with you instead?"

    Most of the time, you'll get intense engagement with the woman while you're there and promises to meet up in future (which they actually look forward to and are easier to arrange because you never think "Must wait 3.4584 days to call her. Must write 0.33x the number of words as she does and 0.45x the number of "I love you's". Instead, you are always acting and speaking according to what you want) If she isn't interested, she'll still go along with you because your behaviour is fun. In which case, enjoy the present moment. Sometimes though, her bitchy behaviour will put you off (if it doesn't, your self-respect is a bigger problem), and following your intentions will lead you to other better, more promising prospects. What's more, you will never feel bad about her turning away because when a woman turns your true intentions down rather than wastes your efforts on manipulation, you will know that you weren't compatible on a deep level and it will genuinely be a mutual and amicable parting.

    EDIT: I Forgot to mention, that being fearlessly true to your intentions automatically passes you in the most common form of shit-tests a woman will give a man approaching her; the congruence test. Since you're already acting according to your intentions, and have already overcome your fear in order to do so, that's easy. CONGRUENCE TESTS IN THE BAG. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?

    [–]Flying_Wingback 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    This really needs to be a post of its own. So many things just clicked in my head right now

    [–]Endorsed ContributorWe_Are_Legion 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Coincidentally, the expression "clicked in my head" reminds me of something I should've mentioned earlier.

    The underlying basis for all I said is the assumption that you already have modes of behaviour that are attractive to women, right this minute, just from the god-given masculine instincts you have. These natural instincts are suppressed right now in favour of meek behaviours due to made-up things like fear of upsetting the group, fear of offending or being rejected, or feeling like you are very low-ranked and no sense of worth. Don't think of learning game as acquiring masculinity, think of it as just expressing the instincts that you already have. You know, I realized that we all wax poetic about "woe-is-me-I-was-so-bluepill..." but undoubtedly, there was always a man too underneath all that mental fat. Think back to the so many attractive moments you've had in even your worst BP days when expressing your natural instincts made your behaviour very masculine.

    • One time I was playing truth and dare with a bunch of guys and girls. I was 12 years old and I was dared to confess to my crush. I told her, but I hesitated like a bitch and tried to set the mood and whatnot. Predictably, she reacted coldly. Somehow, rather than flaring my ego further, it put playful me in control (somehow I enjoyed the feeling of confessing. And I wanted to do it again). So I was like, "wait wait. hold on. I got another crush." And I turned to confess to another girl. And it must have been stylish, because the whole room erupted in laughter. Even both girls giggling and smiling. I didn't know why at the time. I had just done what felt right. Several years later, I noticed that though the 2nd girl didn't say it in front of all those people, in a way BP me could understand at the time, like "Yes" or "WAL, fuck me right in the pussy"... she still kept me talking. She gave me IOIs and huge smiles for years, even kissed me on the cheek once and took me on a date. Though dumb me at the time was firmly controlled by my mind again, and suppressed my instincts. "How could she possibly like me," I thought. What a contrast to the balls of steel

    This is wrong. I want you to relate this story to this extremely important principle I learned. Years later, I learned to ASSUME SHE LIKES YOU. OPERATE LIKE SHE IS NOT PLAYING GAMES. LIKE SHE WOULD DO ALL THE UNGODLY THINGS YOU WANT HER TO. And the behaviour that results from those highly confident assumptions will be very attractive and will destroy any attempt of hers to manipulate you. .

    The point I'm making is Just completely stop trying to manipulate her because you think youre unworthy or delaying what you want to say to her, because you want her to think of you as a "gentleman first" with dates and small talk... if you do stop doing that BP stuff, then you'll be in the mode of behaviour all high-status males are in, all the time.

    Another example that showed me my innate behaviours always existed, even in the worst situations imaginable:

    • When I had my first kiss at 16, I was a very shy and socially awkward boy. I couldn't talk loudly, I lacked assertiveness and even when I watched men acting like men on TV or just around me, I couldn't believe that I too was capable of it. As the author of No More Mr. Nice Guy said, I had "mental blocks. I did not believe I could express myself and still be accepted". The fear generated from mental fluff like my huge ego was overwhelming. Standard BP programming. Yet this girl still liked me. A.K.A. Accepted me. As soon as she convinced me of this fact by making out with me... as soon as I understood that as I made out with this girl, all my mental blocks dissappeared. It somehow awoke this FIRE inside me. I picked her up, and motorboated her, I pushed her on the floor and made out some more. We had sex. All that good stuff. She was a shy girl who only initiated a hesitant peck... but she loved what I did afterwards so much that she used to drag me by the hand to force me to make out with her. She compared her boyfriends (plural) of years to the relatively few trysts she had with me.

    [–]boatyscxslave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Very nice comment thank you

    [–]punchyson 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Just want to say I 100% agree with this.

    [–]ZeppKfw 5 points6 points  (1 child)

    That story where a girl gave "you" a massage and not make a move then she proceeds to say the next day that she wanted to fuck that time is very familiar, I'm pretty sure I've heard that story a dozen times in reddit. I'm a bit skeptical if what you say you did is what you really did.

    [–]BydandMathias 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    It's a way to embellish the story and create empathy with the reader. I've seen endorsed contributors do it, and in this case as well. It's not a big deal honestly as the message is clear.

    [–]TunedtoPerfection 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    The style I have recently adopted with high success has been to be direct with my subconscious communications while in direct with the conscious communication.

    So I'll hold strong direct eye contact, body language, strong kino, etc. while keeping the upper level conversation indirect and using her response as a guide to determine how deep and sexual I will go and how fast I take the overarching conversation there.

    Since doing this I find it funny that inexperienced guys will mostly think this type of behavior is "creepy" while most women will actively defend me while engaged and enjoy the attention a lot. They realize that I "get it" doing this and the push-pull is almost automatic and happens on both levels.

    Builds a TON of sexual tension off the bat and I've found that the more attractive women really enjoy the playful aspect of it. I will say you need a ton of confidence to pull this off and your eye contact needs to be unwaivering while warm and inviting.

    While your learning this eye contact you'll fuck up a lot and be put in some very uncomfortable situations. I've almost gotten into more fights in a few weeks because of this then I ever have from overprotective orbiters and first date "boyfriends". But I just learned to stay strong, playful, and most importantly dismissive/non confrontational. I come off as extremely charming and the other dude usually just looks like a major douche nozzle. If your into "Stealing" women there will be a lot of presented opportunities to do so.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorTaipanshimshon 14 points15 points  (0 children)

    There is no “better”. There is the right approach at the right time that works for you

    [–]-uftw- 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    I tend to use more direct game in high energy situations & where long discussions aren't preferred, ie "in da club". Sometimes you don't even have to utter a word on the dancefloor, body language does the job by itself, you just vibe with the girl (eye contact is key).

    On the other hand, I'll favor indirect in low energy situations and/or if I know I'll be able to come by the target on a regular basis, ie if I'm interested in the barista at my Starbucks for example.

    [–]marcopoloman 11 points12 points  (1 child)

    It's all about rejection. Most hate being rejected. Once you get over that. It's simple.

    [–]LeftAndRed 10 points11 points  (0 children)

    This is the number one reason to use direct game. Learn how to ask without getting anxious.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Indirect game also has an emotional appeal because it allows you to avoid rejection.

    If you're using indirect game b/c you don't want to get rejected, you're not using indirect game to game, you're using it to hide your insecurity and ego from rejection. You're not learning, you're avoiding.

    For the direct game proponents - same thing applies, a lot of people use it to shield their ego too, it's just a different process: usually it's maxlooks followed by direct openers or perhaps even annihilation ("wanna go to my place" is your opener) - that's b/c they want to avoid tension and AA, the faster they ask the faster the tension goes away.

    Put simply, direct game is the best tool for learning how to attract women when you’re inexperienced.

    No, it is not. If you're a newbie that never pulled a girl, your chances of pulling a girl via direct game are low to none b/c you'll lack confidence and congruence. Even if you're really hot guy your lack of game will make you lose girls, especially hotter ones. If you're not a hot guy starting with direct game is setting yourself up for failure in majority of sets.

    Direct game as a learning tool has one place - do indirect game most of the night, and if you don't manage to pull, go direct as last option. This is how you'll both learn direct game and indirect game without wasting opportunities b/c you direct-opened a set that just got to the venue and you're already making moves on the girl, which to most normal (non-gaming) people looks out of context and is interpreted as tryhard and pushy (even if your target likes you, she'll defer to the set and pretend to shun you too).


    The primary distinction between direct and indirect game is context. You're not going to use direct game in inappropriate social situation (she NEEDS plausible deniability, even if you do not need it or don't care about it), you're not going to use indirect game when you're fingering her on the dancefloor. In majority of situations indirect game is better b/c it provides ASD for the girl and doesn't aggravate their set against you. OTOH direct game is pretty good for lone wolves (especially if she looks nervous - she's horny as fuck and wants a dick NOW, this is why she's alone, purposefully no friends so they don't cockblock) and 2 sets (open BOTH girls, even if one is visibly uglier, game BOTH girls, they will usually resolve the issue between them, most often they go to bathroom together, then one of them will leave soon after, if they BOTH stay continue to game them both and you're on your way to a threesome or getting your place robbed).

    [–]simplisticallysimple 6 points7 points  (3 children)

    Indirect game is crap. Makes you look weak, doesn't screen for sexual availability.

    Direct game is what works, but with one huge caveat: don't be explicit.

    Women don't want to take responsibility for their decision to have sex.

    They want it to just happen, or for you to push for it, so she can later justify to herself that it's your doing.

    So be direct, not explicit. "Do you want to have sex with me?" is almost always a no. "Come by my place and have a drink" is a lot better.

    [–]Best_Chorizo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    So you must be directly indirect OR the other way around. Got you !

    [–]1redhawkes 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Direct game is what works, but with one huge caveat: don't be explicit.

    This is the core difference. Being overt will backfire on you. You'll trigger her ASD hard. Always provide plausible deniability.

    The rule of thumb is: "Don't verbalize attraction, escalate to sex".

    Bitches talk sexuality by touching. She knows whats up, just needs you to make it your fault.

    [–]420KUSHBUSH 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Those two examples are literally direct vs indirect game

    [–]Kimdabrim 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    There's also another variable in direct game that will lead you to success with 'yes girls'. If you are ABOVE average looking you will probably find a higher percentage of 'yes girls' but then you might also encounter more girls going with the safe option because they're too intimidated.

    [–]Zech4riah 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I wish I had understood the merits of direct game in my teens. I missed dozens (if not hundreds) of opportunities with women because I just didn’t make my interest clear.

    I can't help myself. Sarcasm must be let out. - Yeah I feel you, I missed also hunderds of opportunities to have sex with hot girls back in my teens. If only I'd understood to get their clothes off and walk them to bedroom.

    Additionally, I think you are comparing blunt direct game with calibrated game here. Words indirect and direct work better in defining type of approach your are doing.

    [–]choyhtya 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    If you can find a way to combine both, it ends up being extremely powerful. I had this girl over a few days ago after talki g woth her at caribou for 5 mins. We were watching a movie in my room and I was escalating quite rapidly. (Direct)

    She swore up and down that she didn't put out on the first date, and that wed have to wait till the second one blah blah blah. I basically said that's all cool theres no rush, I'm just a really sensual guy, we dont have to have sex today. (Indirect, since I still intended to have sex). Not more than a few mins after I said that we started making out, then escalated again and smashed.

    If you can combine direct and indirect approaches I think it can easily sway girls on the fence.

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I think your observations are good but there's nuance: Direct game works in the 'yes girls' and weeds out the 'no girls'. However, MOST girls are going to be 'maybe girls'

    [–]dDiegoDLV 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    direct game vs_indirect game which is better

    the answer is LIFTING. What do I win?

    To be fair I am not one of these guys that thinks game is completely useless. The better looking you are the less game it takes to get them on their back.

    [–]flashcash12 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Direct game only works if you’re attractive. Works really well. If you’re ugly you’re creepy and sexual harassment.

    [–]skrrrttt 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Direct game for when your out if state. Indirect when your in the zone

    [–]ahab_dies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Really great post, thanks OP.

    [–]oytrp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    TRP theory teaches us to never communicate overtly with women. It seems OP has defined direct game in the extreme sense.

    I think direct game isn't saying "want to have sex?", but rather making your intentions clear and it doesn't have to be overtly. Just your gaze, demeanor, and kino is a direct approach.

    [–]rigbed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Take this to Seddit. TRP needs to focus on actual Redpill stuff.

    [–]ArdAtak 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Why not just use social calibration, experience, and instincts to choose the right approach instead of premeditating one? I'm super direct 90% of the time but I know when to intelligently test the waters and get more feedback.

    [–]BeeBopJoe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Theres a huge difference between indirect/direct game and opening direct/indirect. Most guys open direct and then their whole game becomes platonic and indirect.

    For improving your seduction skills I feel like starting indirect is a lot better, helps you learn the timing of when its appropriate to start being more direct, and you dont start out from a chasing frame. Also a girl who is a "yes girl" is still a yes girl regardless of how you open her, if you lost her its due to lack of escalation.

    [–]Da_RectumWrecker 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I use both approaches depending on the situation. If I see a girl that I like but she hasn't noticed me, I will use indirect game. If I lock eyes with a girl (I try to make eye contact with every one of them) and get that smile, I'm going direct right then and there.

    [–]Da_RectumWrecker 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    When I use direct game, I like to do it playfully. I do it as if I'm half joking. I use a different tone of voice but I send all of the sexy body language cues (grab her hands and look into her eyes longingly, etc). If she responds well, then I will keep escalating. If she doesn't respond well, I was only joking and she shouldn't take herself so seriously. It's kind of like in one of Nelly's old songs, "it's getting hot in here", when he says 'I've got a stripper pole in my basement....I was just kidding!.......Unless you're gonna do it'. The half playful, half not allows me to use either type of game depending on the girl's reaction without getting blown out.

    To give an example, I recently did this to pick up my first 10. This was at night on a crowded bar street at about 9pm. We locked eyes. I put on my "I'm lost in your eyes face" and reached out for her hands. She grabbed mine and I simply said "Hello dear" and I exaggerated a longing sigh as if I was reconnecting with a lost love . All of the communication was non-verbal, nothing more needed to be said. Within about 15 seconds of meeting her my hand was on her butt. We exchanged flirty small talk for a couple minutes. I was at work so I couldn't go anywhere with her, so I asked her for her number so we could meet up later. She gave me the dreaded "no I have a bf" while I caressed her butt. Then she turned and walked away. I couldn't bear to see this one get away, so I ran after her and grabbed her by the arm and turned her around. I told her to at least give me her fb info. Her friend responded with "your bf isn't going to like that" as the girl helped me search out her name in my phone.

    I ended up messaging her at around 1am and I couldn't believe it when she agreed to meet up for a last second drink. Her friend had already drunkenly crashed and she came back out alone. Fifteen minutes after we met up I was making out with her. I brought her to my house and made a puddle of her in my bed. She ended up leaving the poor bf to become my plate.

    [–]linkschode 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I only read the first paragraph of your post.

    Direct game is the best - it’s Red Pill at its finest, indirect game is manipulation and the domain of the PUA. The problem with your example of asking a girl for sex isn’t respectful though even if it is what both parties want, it’s just too taboo and slutty, most people are too conformist to admit to being ok with something like that with a stranger right off the bat.

    Plus most of the fun is in the build up - the point at which you admit you both want to fuck happens in that moment when a certain level of attraction and comfort has been built, normally it’s communicated in the eyes and it’s extremely exhilarating, that sexual tension has to be built up first though, and just spilling within a few seconds of meeting ruins all the fun.

    The Red Pill version of direct approach in my estimation is simply walking up to a girl, confidently introducing yourself, communicating that you think she’s attractive and interesting and that you’re interested in getting to know her better.

    Of course there are many ways in which you can communicate this and it doesn’t have to be as direct as the words there, but shit, I’ve opened with those exact words there and it’s been the most reliable shit ever.

    But you have to do it with unshakeable confidence and frame.

    The indirect method is so popular because although it requires confidence, it doesn’t require total confidence. You can distract from any cracks in your confidence by being interesting / funny / the off topic nature of your indirect opening, hence why PUA’s lap that shit up. As far as I can tell many of those guys simply hide their blue pill billy beta bullshit under a huge garbage pile of obfuscation and manipulative fuckery.

    [–]punchyson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    In my opinion you can do both in the same interaction. You could open indirect and after little playful banter or whatever go direct.

    Direct doesn't have to be X-rated language, but it does need to show that your intentions are sexual/dating in nature.

    [–]1KyfhoMyoba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I'm in my 6th decade. If I go direct on girls under 30, (and I'm not much interested in any over 30) security usually gets a call. If I can talk with a girl for a few minutes, I'm golden ( I use Speed SeductionTM) I've tried some experiments with eye contact [alone - no talking until the kiss] and gotten some great results the first night I tried it, but have not been able to replicate that.

    [–]mydogisblack9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    why would anyone ruin their weekend by approaching 50 women? “don’t focus on girls”

    [–]javiercer20 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Anything that is dishonest (pretending you’re not interested=indirect game) is bullshit, you gotta keep it real and frankness all the time

    Speaking your mind all loud will give you that confidence