460
461
462

Red Pill TheoryNewbie Traps: The Problem With Direct Openers (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by thisisntjet

From The Social Lifestyle

Having talked to a couple of new guys in the community and being reminded of the time when I first stepped foot into game, I recognize a lot of the similar potholes in the road to mastering the art of game. The theories being taught have evolved over time, and in a good direction as well. However what puts me off is how guys like to talk down on older theories (i.e., Mystery Method) and how they don't work at all as if female psychology has somehow changed over the last decade or so.

I hear this almost invariably, "I don't believe in PUAs or routine-based game. It's all about being yourself and being natural when approaching the girl." And the guy saying this always does so with a smug, better-than-everything sort of tone. They think they found the new cutting edge in game and are the only ones in on it. Guess what? Natural game has been around for a long time. And almost every one that I've met in the past three years of game all tell me the same thing.

What's more ironic is how these guys then approach a girl with a full on direct opener "Hi, you're cute. I had to say hi" with absolutely zero social acuity. I'd admit I used to do that as well. I guess we all have to go through that phase. But that was after having gone through a year or so of camping at retail outlets, asking girls for opinions. To me, there is a certain process to follow that a lot of the new guys to game are missing out.

Why Indirect?

Game is really all about how "normal" and sociable you can be, while projecting to the girl subtly that you are a sexworthy man. Most guys start off in game with an underdeveloped social ability, as I did. So starting out indirect helped me in three ways.

Build A Strong Foundation

If you watch a lot of the coaches who are really good, you'll realize that good game is really layering sexual intent OVER a social interaction. When I started out, I was scared of even talking to strangers, let alone pick them up. Indirect openers allowed me to build a solid foundation: realizing that girls aren't that scary, learning how to small talk, listen, riff off conversational threads, spot micro-expressions, and a whole host of other things. It is only when I could hold my own in a social interaction, that I could effectively overlay sexual intent.

The problem today is that a lot of guys are taught to go direct from the start. It appeals to the "magic pill" mentality that a lot of newbies crave. Use this line and girls will be attracted to you. That together with the approach machine mantra, what these coaches are basically doing is just playing the numbers game. With enough approaches, any fucking line works. I've seen guys who, with zero social savvy whatsoever, approaching like fifty sets in a day and ending up with nothing but flaky numbers--if they even get any. Then they go home and rest, with nary a debrief, and start over the next day. It's reckless, haphazard, and foolish. It's like taking a M249, taking a deep breath, kicking the door down, eyes shut and just spraying in some general direction hoping to hit your target. You're bound to kill a couple of guys, but once you're out of ammo, you're done.

Sniping, however, is more methodical, calculated, and efficient. Of course, there are days where you have to arm yourself with an XM1014 shotgun and burst down sets (also known as, number farming), but even then, there is a method to the madness. A sort of finesse that newer guys aren't able to grasp when all they learn from the start is how to do the one-shot-hail-Mary-I-think-you're-cute opener.

You'll realize that guys who start out with game this way are still unable to function normally in regular social situations, it's like an on or off switch for them and once it's off they're back to their old selves--weird and unsociable. That is why I would advice newbies to really start from the ground up. I understand the lure of direct openers; it feels like a new superpower--running up to girls and telling them they're gorgeous with no immediate repercussions. But behind all the smokes and mirrors, flash game is has no substance behind it. It might work in the club, but definitely not on the streets. A good day game approach looks like two people just talking and having a fun time to the untrained eye. The seduction happens below the surface.

Which brings me to the next point...

Shows Social Savvy

After having approached thousands hundreds of girls, and having been rejected by a lot of them, I realized one thing: the best openers are those that fall in between direct and indirect. Or what we call, Plausibly Deniable Direct.

Any one with a bit of bravado can walk up and tell a girl she's cute. Coaches will tell you that direct openers project confidence, but I would beg to differ. Straight up direct openers are the game version of a poker player who calls all in every single round, no matter what he has in his hand, and prays that no one calls his bluff. While this may work from time to time, once the girl calls your bluff, you've essentially lost every thing.

Women communicate on two levels: one is the superficial verbal level (i.e., words), and beneath that is the sub-communication (i.e., euphemisms, non-verbals, sarcasm). When you open with a plausibly deniable direct opener, you are sub-communicating to her that you have social savvy. The whole conversation operates on a "you know that I know that you know that I know..." frame, and she covertly complies or rejects you on that level. All these require calibration and ability to read and size a person up, which comes from first building a strong foundation of social normality.

You have to build the foundation with indirect openers, overlay it with the design that is direct openers, then finish it all up with plausibly deniable direct openers. Maybe there is a next level of openers that I am not able to recognize yet that the advanced guys are doing, but for now, realize that no one is above the process. If you just skip ahead of learning process, you'll end up having to backtrack every once in a while to learn something that you should have already learned earlier on.

Like I mentioned, there's no point in trying to overwhelm the girl with superficial bravado. They're not stupid. It may work on the less socially adept girls, or on yes girls. But where the real game is played--with the maybe girls--this sort of fizzy clown game might get her attention, but once the bubble bursts, she will leave and not want to see you ever again. I've been stuck in that phase and had to work hard to get rid of the habit (sometimes I still fall back into it). It's not easy. Direct game is addictive. You just need to do as many approaches and you'll hit one yes girl invariably. But it is not efficient. And it is even more rare that the yes girl is going to be the type of girl you really want in your life.

Girls generally are emotional and not logical. Guys know this but they don't understand it and know how to use it. Going direct is communicating with her logical brain. It's not softened and not deniable. And unless your presence gives her the tingles, that is, if you're good looking--which most guys doing game don't have this advantage--going direct will harm your game. Now she has to logically decide on the spot, and you're a stranger so the answer is no. Whereas if you soften the direct opener with a tease or a joke, now she can take it better and you are giving her good emotions without it being a logical "choose now" decision.

Control The Frame Of The Interaction

The problem with straight up direct openers is that you've basically conveyed to her that you are sold, before even getting to know her or anything about her. And you are expecting her to be sold on the first impression as well. Unless she's a yes girl, this will hardly ever work.

When you go direct, she knows she's got you. Assuming she's attractive, since you approached her, she probably gets checked out, approached, or validated by men from the moment she walks out her house. You're no different. Going direct only reinforces that reality. Sure, you may say that most guys don't approach her and that by going direct you are standing out. But like I said, bravado is easily differentiated from confidence. You project that you like her, and she doesn't even have to do anything. You're just one of the guys who maybe managed to gather his balls and talk to her, but mentally she puts you in a box with every other chump.

Plausible Deniable Direct on the other hand projects to her that you are intrigued but not sold. That this is a dance where the both of you are sizing each other up. You decide whether you want to pursue, and she decides whether she will let you. It is all subtle, and beneath the surface. Girls enjoy the dance as much as men do--maybe even more.

But all in all, it allows you to easily set the frame such that she has to invest into the interaction if she is equally intrigued. A direct opener doesn't give you that edge from the get-go, you don't stand out. It shows that you don't "get it" (in both senses of the term). And once you start from a place of lower value, it's an uphill battle. That's why most guys fumble when talking to high value attractive women, because they set themselves up for failure from the start.


P.S. This article is merely my opinion on an observation I made. I am not shitting on any dating coaches out there. This is not a competition as to who is better. Every one has their own styles and methods and teachings. What I am saying is that it is important to differentiate the signal from the noise. Flash game doesn't mean good game. Just because a girl is standing in front of a guy and is talking to him doesn't make him good at game. The devil is in the details.


[–]BloodAwaits 97 points98 points  (6 children)

This was extremely well written. If this is your post I seriously look forward to reading more. Content regarding the analysis of how game and social interactions work is necessary, and allows one to understand WHY they're doing something instead of just doing it. It's the entire basis of this sub.

Now onto the actual post. The notion itself is interesting. From what I understand your method of approaching is rooted in a form of indirect abundance mentality. You show you have the balls to approach, displaying confidence, but also convey that she needs to work for it a little too because you have other options.

This has a dual effect, people are always going to appreciate something they have to work for a bit, both men and women. The chase is all part of the game. No one would go hunting if the deer walked infront of your gun and pulled the trigger for you. That's almost what a direct approach is, as you said with your poker analogy, it's like going all in on the first hand.

I think the issue is just how difficult it is to learn subtextual communication for the uniniated. It's all power talk, saying one thing but meaning another. But it's how women communicate, and as you said, appealing to their form of communication, completely based on emotion and resulting feelings, makes them more susceptible to your approaches.

Once again, great post. It'd be beneficial if you could develop this into a series of posts, going into the nuances of subtextual communication and plausible deniability. It's something a lot of newbies, myself included, have difficulty with.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 22 points23 points  (4 children)

Thanks for the feedback. Appreciate it. Yeah I'll try to write more along those lines.

[–]strps 9 points10 points  (3 children)

Btw, an example would go a long way towards making your claims appear more concrete.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Sure thing. I replied a PM earlier with this.

An indirect opener, in my definition, would be something that takes something about her visually (preferably something that she has intentionally chosen--jewelry, fashion, etc) and commenting on it. Adding a playful tease (not an insult) would be a plus.

For example: "Hi, you just walked by me and for some reason I can't stop looking at your strange fashion. I love it. The ostentatious tribal necklace, looks like something you bought from a flea market. What's the story behind it?"

And to get the number is easy, assuming you had an enjoyable conversation. "Anyway, I have to go. I'll tell you a secret. I really enjoyed talking to you. I'd love to continue this conversation over coffee. Would you like that?"

I always believe in asking a girl if she would like it. Give them a choice to say and and the yes becomes more meaningful. It's easy to pressure and hustle for the number, but most of them turn out to be flakes."

For me, it helped me size someone up very quickly and run the conversation from there.

Hope it helps. Comments appreciated.

[–]14931125 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Please correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't this come off as a bit weird?

She knows that you don't care about her jewllery, you don't care about her jewllery, so why would you be commenting on it?

Isn't it lower value to be talking about somthing you have no interest in?

[–]thisisntjet[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Which is why it's all about subcommunication. Or "you know that I know that you know that I'm not talking about your jewelry". The more savvy girls know this and can play along. The less savvy girls you have to spell it out.

Bottom line is: girls aren't men with boobs. Don't expect them to communicate logically like men. "Oh I like x so let's talk about x." And to answer your last question: no it's not lower value.

[–]1independentmale 10 points11 points  (0 children)

No one would go hunting if the deer walked infront of your gun and pulled the trigger for you.

I had fresh deer steak for dinner last night and you're wrong. They are fucking delicious.

Seriously, great response to an outstanding post. OP, I hope you keep writing. You have a talent and I'd love to read more.

[–]ActuallyARaptor 25 points26 points  (37 children)

what's your example of a plausibly deniable direct?

[–]thisisntjet[S] 33 points34 points  (25 children)

Good question. My framework for an opener is usually to use something about her to open. For example, she's tall, skinny, and has long legs. "Hi, I've to go in a minute but I saw you and I just wanted to tell you that you look like a really adorable giraffe."

It's direct but it's softened with the tease, rather than leaving it hanging there after "adorable".

"Hi...your fashion sense is really strange. Very rebellious with those spiked boots. I love it. Kinda reminds me of...(assumption stack)..."

Hope it helps.

[–]TRP Vanguardnicethingyoucanthave 16 points17 points  (2 children)

use something about her to open

Use something that she has consciously chosen. Don't compliment her on her genetics, which she has no control over.

A safe(ish) bet is earrings. You can ask if they're homemade or something. I've opened a few girls by complimenting their phone case, especially if it's really ostentatious. I'll say, "hey I've got that same case!" She says, "seriously?" Then I pull my phone out, act surprised, and say, "this isn't my phone? WTF?"

Maybe you're slick enough to pull off the giraffe thing, but I can't imagine that ever working for me. The tall girls I've known have actually been kind of self conscious about it - it just seems like an awful opener. I also try to avoid anything along the lines of "you're cute" - she hears that enough already.

The best openers are funny. You get a quick laugh and then introduce yourself. If you don't get the laugh they're not into you - just move on. No point in pushing it.

[–]Diabolo_Advocato 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with you. His example is a classic neg. It fits his description as well, but that is like saying "I am a son", "aren't you a brother, too", "Oh yea, there's that".

Light self deprecating humor gets a lot more distance than a neg. Women (any worth their salt) will see right through a neg.

[–]Doomsday_ 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't say these are "plausibly deniable." Rather, I would say that they are direct openers that include a challenge/tease. You hit on her but you show that you're not completely sold--she has to qualify herself to you and invest in the interaction.

Complement+tease is quite similar to Krauser's direct day game opener.

[–]Red_pills 23 points24 points  (11 children)

You open with 'hey you look like a giraffe? ' no wonder you've been rejected a lot.

[–]2insickness 25 points26 points  (9 children)

no wonder you've been rejected a lot

He gets rejected a lot because he approaches a lot. You don't? You have a magic opener? No. Of course you don't.

If you'd done as much approaching as OP has, you would know that this type of thing works pretty well. Being too direct puts too much pressure on her. She thinks less of you because you immediately put her on a pedestal. Her first instinct is to get away.

The giraffe part is a bit negative. That's what makes it work. It fucks with her a little bit. It shows he's not trying to impress her. It makes her slightly insecure about something that men normally fawn over: her long legs. Amongst the good feelings of his compliment there is something mixed in there that bothers her. It's the hook in the pillow. It gives her ego something to wrestle with and sets OP apart from all the men who simply fawn over her. It makes her work to get his full validation.

If you know anything about game, women, and red pill in general, you would see this.

[–]Grifter32 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly, and chicks love giraffes.

Source: Dated a chick who loves giraffes

[–]1independentmale 1 point2 points  (3 children)

The thing is, it's only negative if you make it negative. Who doesn't like giraffes? They are cute as fuck.

There is a difference between teasing and negging. I don't do negs, I just don't think they're effective, but I will tease the piss out of a girl with a goofy grin on my face all day long. They eat that shit up. If she's laughing and having a good time, what's the problem?

[–]2insickness 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I don't do negs, I just don't think they're effective, but I will tease the piss out of a girl with a goofy grin on my face all day long.

You're too nice to use negs. Yeah, well, it's all the same. When you use a neg correctly girls will laugh at it just like teasing. They fucking love it.

[–]TRPthrowaway456 0 points1 point  (1 child)

So, if I understand this right, a neg is done well if it makes her question whether the comment was insulting or playfully endearing whereas a tease is usually overtly and obvious in its playful tone?

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding where we draw the line between negging and teasing.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it's just semantics. Nothing to worry about if you understand what is socially calibrated and what isn't.

[–]Red_pills 1 point2 points  (1 child)

He gets rejected a lot because he approaches a lot. You don't? You have a magic opener? No. Of course you don't.

That's one way to view it. But if you're hardly ever having any success maybe you're doing something wrong. It's easy to hamster away your failures rather than owning them and improving I guess.

If you'd done as much approaching as OP has, you would know that this type of thing works pretty well.

Sorry I didn't realize from one comment I made you know my whole life story.

The giraffe part is a bit negative. That's what makes it work. It fucks with her a little bit. It shows he's not trying to impress her. It makes her slightly insecure about something that men normally fawn over: her long legs. Amongst the good feelings of his compliment there is something mixed in there that bothers her. It's the hook in the pillow. It gives her ego something to wrestle with and sets OP apart from all the men who simply fawn over her. It makes her work to get his full validation.

I agree it may work during conversation for the said reasons delivered with the right frame. As an opener? I'd love to see you field test this and see how many actual girls you managed to 'hook'.

If you know anything about game, women, and red pill in general, you would see this.

I love how you analyzed all my knowledge, experience and results off one comment how astute. You run around keep calling girls giraffes and I'll pick them up after they've finished laughing at you.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Well, as some people have mentioned, any line works if 1. the girl is a yes girl, or, and I add, 2. you have a good vibe. Of course I don't run around calling girls giraffes. I agree only idiots do that. But occasionally you hit a good spot and it can be a good tease. I'm not presenting it as THE MAGIC PILL: STEP ONE CALL THEM GIRAFFES...

Hope it clears things up.

[–]seducer4real 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Or "hey, gotta go, but tbh you look like a cute bitch"

wonders why he gets rejected

[–]Upvote_To_The_Left 7 points8 points  (3 children)

Calling her a giraffe? I don't know about that dude. I'm having a hard time seeing that working.

Generally it's not a good idea to tease people for things that they can't change, it can easily be interpreted as dickyness.

[–]KingoftheAssholes 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I think if you say it with a cocky funny vibe you can get away with it.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

True. Generally I try to make it come across as though I'm joking. Not to be mean. Some girls take it well. I'll leave a huge pause between the cute and the tease, I've gotten good hooks with it (playful indignation). The worst response is that the girl doesn't hear it. No one has taken offense. Maybe cuz I only use it when I'm in a playful mood. If I feel I don't have a good vibe, I'll stick to safer openers like the fashion one. "...strange but I love it..."

[–]ptokerT 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Isn't that called 'negging'?

[–]thisisntjet[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes it is. But that term seems to leave a sour taste in people's mouths for some reason.

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

I've only heard of "negging" because of the League. Hilarious.

[–]sirpsycho3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jesus christ I rather walk around a clown suit than to open a girl a adorable giraffe. You're putting on a dance twirling around with sparklers in your hand, figuratively. I would redefine your view of foundation as having value in your self. If you're so socially inept that you can't be a wreck making small talk then that's a different discussion. Those lines you spew is retarded, every girl sees through that bullshit. I'd focus more on your demeanor, tone, and embracing your masculinity

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

hey i like it, and I'm an advocate of doing what works for you. great post man

[–]TRPtophan 6 points6 points [recovered]

"You're going to come back to my place and watch a movie."

Response is almost always "oh, am I?"

Then agree & amplify.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Love this.

Might use it if I'm in a good vibe that day. Can't see myself pulling it off congruently if I feel like shit. Lol.

[–]1independentmale 0 points1 point  (3 children)

How many times has this been successful for you? I'm genuinely curious.

[–]TRPtophan 8 points8 points [recovered]

Best results I've gotten were online.

Don't be afraid to get creative with it: "you're coming over to play cards," or "you're going to make me dinner at your place." The key is to come across as demanding, commanding, and DGAF about getting laid one bit. Act like you say that kind of shit to all the girls. Agree & amplify is powerful stuff.

I'm in the process of switching 100% to day game, but there was a time when it worked well in the club too. I would drop something similar on a few girls, then disappear and the interested ones would inevitably go hunting for me.

If you're going to run direct game, best advice I can give is: STOP TRYING TO GET LAID. Tell 'em to do something non-sexual for you and run with it to completion. They eat that shit up.

If you can game a girl into making you a sandwich, you're halfway to telling her to polish your knob. Girls want to be taken. Girls want to be told. Girls want to be subservient. And girls want to be able to fling your "shit" right back at you and watch you smile it all off with Amused Mastery.

Game is a response, not a stimulus. Most guys starting out with pickup fail because they haven't learned to watch for IOIs and respond to them. DHV is being bold, which I regard as different than gaming.

[–]phaed 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Good advice, cleared some things up for me.

[–]catshit69 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Boom. This usually works. I also will usually say something along the lines of "so, xyz where am I staying tonight?" Granted that's only after a few minutes of test conversation. If I can tell she's into me I use it, if not then I'll usually leave soon after.

[–]babyboi12 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What would A&A look like for, "Oh, am I?"

[–]nomad-oz 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I accidently seduced the wrong girl a few times When meeting up with a group of friends friends for the first time. They were standing around in a loose group and I chatted up a girl standing near by.

I've sat at the wrong table bought drinks for a group of girls and chatted for 20min before my mate came over and said they were on the next table. I got her number and moved to the other table.

Each time it has been very effective because I was not gaming but just building new friends. My opening line was... sorry I'm late the queue took forever to get in.

If you do this move intentionally you can claim pausable deniability. ... Oh I thought you were here with X.

[–]ActuallyARaptor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hey i like that whole sit at the wrong table. moving to a new city next week and I'll need some new tactics

[–]thisisntjet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like this one. Might try it just for kicks if I feel like just goofing around.

[–]Upvote_To_The_Left 43 points44 points  (13 children)

I was hoping to get an example of Plausible Deniable Direct opener.

[–]franklyforthright 5 points6 points  (10 children)

Introduce yourself and start telling her a story

[–]140Watts 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Use a situational opener. If she latches onto it then you know you may have something.

[–]Emxif 19 points20 points  (7 children)

I agree with you, but going direct doesn't mean you have to be socially inept. Going direct then being able to follow up with normal, socially aware interaction sets you apart from the guys who just go direct and stay there, or the guys that simply cat call, if you'd even call that direct.

When I began I felt learning to go direct helped me learn it's okay to convey intent, and indirect was just a crutch that allowed me to avoid my anxieties. No matter what approach you recommend, you'll still find newbies running around like chickens with their heads cut off.

I go direct all the time, especially in the day time and I have success with it.This is generally with a low pressure direct open and I lay off it until it's reciprocated. I'm an introverted guy and I find this is just more efficient and more genuine for me.

Saying you're taking a sniper approach doesn't dramatically change the odds, but it does dramatically increase your time investment, unless you're waiting for approach invitations. At the end of the day it's still going to be a numbers game with around 10% chance of compatibility, so why not focus on screening? Unless you have the energy and patience. My two cents.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 6 points7 points  (6 children)

Yeah I agree with the first statement. I'm actually writing this article for newbies. Direct game works most definitely. But it's the way a lot of new guys, who probably have less than a couple of hundred approaches under their belt, think that it's like the magic pill superpower type of opener. And they neglect the actual part of game where you have to be normal, cool, and fun. I've watched many guys run around like monkeys. It's embarrassing.

You're right about the 10% and screening part.

[–]Emxif 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haha very true. I can't even deny I wasn't one of those guys for a period of time.

Im looking at your reply to ActualRaptor and it seems like my current open seems a lot like yours so I'm definitely in agreement with you.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

who probably have less than a couple of hundred approaches

You also claim in the OP that you've approached thousands of women.

I call bullshit. Absolute bullshit on both counts dude. I don't believe that at all.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I claimed it. Whether you believe me or not doesn't matter. I respect a critical mind. Take what works for you, discard what doesn't.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

But why did you claim it? I would have believed you if you had said you've approached hundreds of women (possible in a city or if you just travel a lot). Thousands though... you'd have to talk to every random slag you see walking down the street every free moment you get.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It was just a rough gauge. But let's say 3000 over 3 years, that's about 3 girls a day? It;s quite possible where I'm from. Maybe you're right, but definitely more than a few hundreds. I'll edit it if it bothers you.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I came off as (and was) too rash and abrasive with my comment. It made me a bit peeved because something that really irks me is when people start swinging their dicks with insane claims when it comes to girls. Also, it irked me more so that your OP was very honest and targeted towards 'newbies', and then there's just the number thrown in casually of having met thousands of girls. I shouldn't have gotten so mad about it, but hundreds is more likely than thousands (honestly, do PUAs even meet thousands of girls? I really doubt it).

[–]notrustled 8 points9 points  (3 children)

You'll realize that guys who start out with game this way are still unable to function normally in regular social situations, it's like an on or off switch for them and once it's off they're back to their old selves--weird and unsociable.

this has to be the mother of all problems. they aren't being guided about how to become better in social interactions, how to manage your life better, how to become a better man in general, etc. - it's only about getting the pussy, which is fine in itself. the trouble starts when newbies think it's gonna solve all of their problems. people around them are like "oh, just get a girl, you're gonna feel better!" - yeah, go pick some from the tree, it's sooo easy - then they wonder why are they still feeling miserable despite gaining the knowledge they think they only needed. I know because it was me not so long ago. it's like a rooftop in the air, without a house under it.

I'm waiting for your next post.

[–]MorePancakes 22 points23 points  (2 children)

This my friend is exactly where TRP and PUA varies. I read a lot about game, but I decided my first year of swallowing the pill (been here about 8 months) would not be dedicated to approaches or women. I would live the MGTOW life.

I've stopped bitching and whining about wanting my unicorn.

I've dropped 80 lbs (30 more to go)

I have a better job.

I have cut out every single girl I used to orbit.

I have rid myself of every remnant of onitus that lingered in my mind.

I've focused on building better relationships with the trustworthy brothers (male friends) in my life.

I grew an awesome beard.

My overall life quality is better, I'm happier, I know longer associate the lack of an LTR as my failure as a man but for the first time in my life I own and love my singledom.

Yes, plenty of men on TRP will say I need to be approaching or spinning, but where I was in my life I didn't need that, my path to being a better man is the route of MGTOW and a hiatus of female attention and connection.

Cheers, MP

[–]Frietjeman 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Don't let anyone tell you what you need in your life. Nobody but you can figure that out. Especially not the cockbrains who value people based on whether or not they're in an LTR.

Keep up the good work brother.

[–]1wall-of-meth 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Very well written post. I like it.

Your idea and explanation put into words what was lingering in the back of my mind. I thought about the obvious differences in direct all in approaches and approaches that are more like chatting but distincitve between the lines. Sure enough, the obvious differences can be seen fast, and then I tried to get the more subtle ones. That was hard. I was on the tracks of something like the dance you described, now I have the words to describe it too.

I appreciate your work, keep it on.

[–]1iluminatiNYC 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Excellent point. That said, I do think you're ignoring how bad off so many dudes start off with. At some point, they just need to get off their ass and learn something. Is the magic pill direct opener all they need to know? No. But they need to start with that if only just to get a book on women and what they respond to.

The only way you learn to socially interact is to socially interact. Now, there should be taking notes of reactions, making sure you learn from what went wrong and so on. However, so many dudes are starting from absolute zero that it's silly to completely ignore the other stuff.

[–]Endorsed ContributorScumbagBillionaire 19 points20 points  (17 children)

I think you're overthinking things.

If a girl is attracted to you it doesn't matter whether you approach directly or indirectly.

If a girl is not attracted to you it doesn't matter whether you approach directly or indirectly.

[–]MorePancakes 20 points21 points  (1 child)

Rule #1 of game: Be attractive

Rule #2: Don't be unattractive .

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

In a nutshell, this.

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]Endorsed ContributorScumbagBillionaire 11 points12 points  (8 children)

I mean theoretically yes.

But women for the most part know after 5 seconds of looking at you whether or not they'd give you access to their pussy.

Whether you approach directly or indirectly isn't going to hugely impact attraction, which is not created and is not a choice.

People getting caught up in the dogmatic PUA way of thinking is silly. So many guys think "If I can just do the right thing, she'll like me!" or "Wow she didn't like me, I must have done something wrong!"

In reality the times we're successful it's because the woman was into us from the get go. When we fail it's often because the woman simply isn't attracted to us. Not because we approached the right or wrong way.

[–]C_D_O 4 points5 points  (5 children)

I disagree. Flirting is social sparring, you lose or you come off as uncool, shes not going to fuck you.

Ive had this go both ways before. I've managed to charm a bitch who was giving me ice initially, Ive also managed to spill my spaghetti with a cutie who was blatantly into me from the get go and watch the attraction just fade away right in front of me. Embarrassing to be sure, but a lesson learned all the same.

I think the debate over indirect vs direct is silly yes, but you seem to be suggesting game is irrelevant and only looks matter.

[–]BrotherBloodAngel 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Not a written rule. I had been on a bluepill first date well before I found trp, got ice cream in a park during a hot summer day. I had been focusing on the convo so much I didn't notice myself dripping ice cream on my pants and shoes. I unintentionally held frame about it instead of durfing and acting embarrassed and she was actually charmed by it. Perfection is not always attractive, and what is attractive is not always a science.

Perhaps it just didn't mesh with your frame. You projected probably some professional manly demeanor, then suddenly spaghetti.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]BrotherBloodAngel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haha, now that you mention that and I reread that sentence you're right. I glossed over the wording.

[–]Endorsed ContributorScumbagBillionaire -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Flirting occurs after the approach.

A bitch giving you "ice" means nothing if she agreed to hang out with you anyways. The aloofness or "ice" was clearly just a shittest since she went out with you anyway. If she wasn't attracted she wouldn't have given you the opportunity to hook up with her.

Spilling spaghetti on a bitch is also a poor example. First off, that has nothing to do with OPENING. This is actual interaction. The opener already occurred and was insignificant. Women are fickle. There's a window of time you have to fuck them. Sometimes it's a week, sometimes it's 10 minutes. You can make out with a girl in the club, finger her in the bathroom, and try to walk her to your apartment which is 5 minute's walking distance and she'll bail on you at the door.

None of this shit has to do with how you opened her.

[–]PlebDestroyer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Flirting occurs after the approach.

Doesn't it occur after the opener?

None of this shit has to do with how you opened her.

RSD Julian has said it a million times. Openers don't mean shit.

I agree with you, but the massive amount of upvotes this post has may mean this is something to consider, no?

[–]nomad-oz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes girls do decide if you're doable in 5 sec They dress up and want you to approach them Whether the give it or not they delight to be asked They hate when you beat around trying to impress them But, as OP says your social acuity is paramount.

Girl swaying to the music notices you looking Looks away increases her dance movements Gives you a second glance You approach her Is it true women size up guys in 5sec? She smiles and nods * I have three questions. Do you want to hug me?* Put out your arms, big smile, invite her to hug you. If she hugs you Do you want to kiss me? Turn cheek and invite her to kiis. if she moves in. Go for a passionate lip kiss. Do you want to get out of here?

Oh! there was a lot of unsaid gestures:- looking her over nodding approvingly. Holding eye contact. smiling cheekily. Whispering the questions in her ear while hoiding her. drawing out the question slowly, pausing to blow on her neck. Breathing in her perfume, Building sexual tension.

This has worked for me because I have correctly read her signals she was DTF. It was simple, not much chance of stuffing up. It was direct, She either does or dosen't. Confident, She knew what I wanted but still wanted to be asked.

Most women desperately want male approval. She can either please me and make herself feel good. Or refuse me and feel bad for hurting my feelings.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Good point and exactly what I mentioned in the article. You don't have to game "yes" and "no" girls, but the real game is played with "maybe" girls.

[–]1aguy01 1 point2 points  (2 children)

This. This is why the PUA approach is a scam. TRP says the pussy you get is a function of your SMV, therefore focus on your SMV. PUA assumes game is the only aspect of SMV.

[–]esco_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is very black and white thinking...

There are elements of PUA that are helpful to TRP, and obviously heaps of TRP is helpful to PUA

[–]a_nus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whether she's attracted to you or not depends on many things, including your approach. "Being attractive" is an over simplification of a lot of things. You don't have to obsess about every single detail, but some analysis is necessary especially for dudes browsing this sub.

[–]Sesa_Refum 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is good shit OP. I see guys all the time opening by going up to a girl and saying the same canned "You look really cute I had to come over and say Hi". Always knew it was jenk but couldn't pit my finger on why.

This technique adheres well to the laws of power as well. #3 (conceal intention) #8 (make others come to you) and #20 (don't commit to anyone) and #33/17 (discover each mans thumbscrew/maintain an aura of mystery)

By going up to a girl and immediately telling her you want her directly, you tell her exactly what it is you are hoping to get so that she may covertly dangle it in front of you throughout the interaction/shut you down immediately. You let her know exactly what you desire from her and that puts her in a position of power over you. No tact, no suave.

By being plausible-deniable indirect, you rope her into an interaction where you maintain independence, and aura of mystery and concealed intent. She cannot then immediately forced make a judgement about you in the frame of sex, allowing you a better chance to display value and stimulate her on the psychological emotional level before going in for the kill.

"Bravado ≠ confidence/dominance", very true.

[–]FishFoxFerret 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Indirect game also gives the impression that you don't need/want her and that you already have a girlfriend/women in your life.

I've found it to be to far superior to direct game.

[–]prodigyx 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This was an excellent post. Please do a follow up expanding on Plausibly Deniable Direct openers.

[–]Rhunta 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I think that I am not well informed on game, but what is an indirect opener?

[–]2wiseclockcounter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

opening a girl is starting a conversation with her. The purpose of the conversation is invariably about your attraction and intention towards her (the actual content could be anything). But you can communicate that fact directly or indirectly. "Hey I think you're really cute, how's your night?" -directly states your interest. Doing so indirectly takes a much more social awareness and tact, which is OP's whole point. So it's a combination of playful wording, body language and eye contact, and the inner frame you're working from that all work together to subcommunicate your attraction in an effective way that says to her "I want you" without literally saying those words.

to summarize the context of the rest of the comments, people are debating the merits/usefulness of choosing one or the other in light of women's keen social senses.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Jesus so much text with so much theory and no examples AT all

[–]newbie3hunna 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Can I get an example for walking up to a group of girls on the beach who are just sitting around tanning? I have no problem opening other girls but when they are up the beach a bit it seems hard to be casual when you have to walk up to them.

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

Then have a reason to walk by and seem as if "you just had to" say something, but not in any desperate way, more like a great opportunity to say "hi" and introduce yourself came up.

Extra challenge: do this in Vancouver at Wreck Beach. It's 1 block away from UBC campus and it's a nude beach. Pro-tip: they won't talk to you if you're clothed and they're naked. Period.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

A woman has to like you for any "strategy" to work. Don't believe the hype that these PUAs try to push. Words don't mean much without means. It really applies to people in general.

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

It's true but your introductory posture, pace of movement, facial expression, reflects (she believes) all your past success (or failure) with other women just like her or better (her perception). You get a few free milliseconds to screw with her perception of reality because she already knows she's not smart enough to actually know what's going on and will take a best-aimed guess.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say that if a woman likes you, any strategy works. But for those who are like "wait let's see what he's got." if you don't play it right, she'll screen you out faster than you can say "wait, one more thi-..."

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (4 children)

"...unless she's a yes girl..."

If you're going into an interaction with anything except the mindset that she's a yes girl, you're doing it wrong.

Why?

Because if you assume "yes" from the beginning, you don't go in guns blazing. You're relaxed, easygoing, and don't even have to think about going direct.

Every girl is a yes girl. If you think you have to turn her into a yes girl, you've failed and shouldn't even try because you're stepping yourself down and notch, thereby playing into her shit tests before they even start. Any woman with an iota of experience will smell your lack of inner game from a mile away.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 8 points9 points  (3 children)

This, I cannot agree with.

Realistically speaking, there are girls who are just uninterested or unavailable. They may be polite or just plain sociable. The both of you can be enjoying yourselves, but if she's unavailable, she's unavailable.

To me it is important to filter out "no" girls quickly. It's hard enough turning a "maybe" into a "yes". I'm not saying it's impossible, but to me, it's not worth my time.

My distinction between "maybe" and "yes" girls is that, you don't have to game yes girls. They are sold on the open, and you just have to not do anything stupid and lead them through the process. They will generally be compliant.

If you do that to a maybe girl, assuming the close, it can work sometimes, but sometimes it's just poor social savvy. You have to know what she's thinking and do the social dance. Ignoring it and assuming the close go both ways imo.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I disagree with you here as well.

Women don't go "maybe" nearly as much as people think. They yes or no men, just like we yes or no women, right off the bat. There are very few times when anyone is actually on the fence about sleeping with another person. Any convincing you might do is really just helping someone reason out the yes that's already sitting in her brain.

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

They do it plenty and for them "maybe" is covering subtext you're supposed to read as "really yes, but in a minute" or "really no, unless I can't find another guy, then it's yes".

It's pretty damn common.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then I guess I agree with you. But what I mean by a yes girl is a girl who happens to fancy your type, is in the right point of her life to meet someone, and offers no resistance at all, and is generally logistically and emotionally settled to let you into her life.

Any sort of hesitation or resistance (having to do the dance for a bit) I classify as "maybe" girl, just maybe on the higher or lower end of the spectrum. Still I think we're on the same train of thought.

[–]Pathfinder24 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Damn, this is some real knowledge. Reading this sub makes me wonder why no one teaches this shit earlier.

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

Because most people here have no idea how to read body language, inject nuance with NLP and use subtext as a primary mode of communication. That's how women talk to each other, not how men talk to each other.

[–]BadCopWithDonut 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Direct game doesn't work on the streets? That's some bullshit man.

Opening direct doesn't mean that you are all sold to her already. If you open indirect she fucking knows what you want aswell if she is not stupid.

At the end of the day your opening isn't the biggest sticking point. Its mostly about your body language and sub communication.

Personally I love opening direct cause it actually does show that you are a fucking man that goes for what he wants. But opening direct doesn't imply that you keep complimenting her after the opening.

You just have to make clear that you like her appearance and have a genuine interest to find out if her personality is worth getting to know.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there might be some misunderstanding. One of the points I was trying to get across is how newbies use (or, rather, misuse) direct game which causes them to learn how to actually be normal. I'm not saying direct game doesn't work. I've used it myself and it works great when I'm in state and have a good general vibe. That's why the article is titled newbie trap. For intermediate guys, once you got a good solid foundation and know how to be normal, anything works, really.

[–]mvg210 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great read, can you give us some examples?

[–]AnonE_Mouse1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great writing. More please. How do I geld?

[–]kevkos 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Forget about lines or direct/indirect. Just ask girls how their day is and take it from there. You will meet 10,000% more women and your odds of hooking up are about the same than if you were super smooth and funny and said everything exactly right. In fact the authenticity increases your odds of connecting.

[–]fhghg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's classic how to win friends and influence people. Get them talking about their favorite person.

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

summarized: use nuance and not by accident

[–]Ex-AlodianKnight 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Looks like I'll be ditching my "Hey baby, lookin good" line, which I use at beerpong bars. That's direct, but too direct.

[–]thisisntjet[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey if it works for you, it works for you. I'm just some dude on the internet. lol

[–]1NV0K3R 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is another thing I've noticed with Tinder/OKC. Everyone just wants that one line that will get her to fuck you.

It doesn't work that way kids. You have to express value to be sexed and getting fed lines, while it may work every blue moon(shit when I first started I landed a cute Tinder ONS that I would NEVER have gotten otherwise) it's really a GUIDELINE. Being passively direct(passive aggressive...wait a second...)while implying sexually overt energy is the key to success.

[–]JetteAuLoinTRP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tl;Dr : powertalk is more powerful than gametalk, and will make them wet.

[–]-Awake- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's amazing how internalizing TRP makes your game more natural. I used to run indirect to "make her feel like I was sizing her up", even though I was already down to take her to bed

When you lose the goddess complex and see girls for what they are, not any attractive girl will do. Now I want to run indirect so I can weed out the girls that I can't stand talking to for more than 5 minutes

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks OP for sharing your insight, I especially like the plausible deniability angle. I think there are good ideas from both strategies, and which one to use is both person and situation dependent.

I want to point out one thing which commenters have alluded to but not overtly stated... Outcome Independence. It's the most important facet of approach, enabling the freedom to act within your own frame. Much of the debate in the commentary subtly revolved around that simple paradigm.

[–]dedom19 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Enjoyed the read and liked your examples. Giraffe one is funny.

One of my favorite ways to approach an attractive girl or group of attractive girls in a bar or similar setting is to ask her if she knows of a place around nearby where there is dancing, or perhaps a different type of music. It kind of puts her in a position where I'm non threatening, perhaps not even interested in her. I can watch her social ques and start conversation from there since I've already established that I don't have much invested in being at that particular bar. If she seems uninterested in being talked to it is an easy separation after she gives her advice on fun locations. Or perhaps she is interested and I end up with a number or even a companion to the bar she mentioned. Thoughts?