Post: #1

I think we can all agree that online dating is a veritable cesspool of trannies, catfish, prostitutes, bots, and women who look nothing like their pics.

I've seen posts on here where dudes claimed to bang shorty after shorty off online dating. I was always highly suspicious. I have multiple good looking friends who have experienced zero succcess on there. I figured these dudes claiming success either were flat out lying or banging ugly women (4s and below).

So I did the only natural thing and created a fake Tinder account featuring an obscure male model. Not sure what rating I'd assign him, since I'm not gay, but since he's a male model, I'd assume most women would consider him a 9.

I maxed out the limit of right swipes in a 12 hour span which was 100. It's now been 19 hours since then and I have received *DRUM ROLL* 2 matches. 2!!! 2 women out of 100 have swiped right on this male model account, further proof that online dating is the LEAST effective way to meet women, unless you're interested in DUMPSTER DIVING.

TL;DR: Don't be a mark ass trick. Sack up and approach women in the flesh. It's more effective and it builds your confidence, social skills, ability to connect with others, and it enables you to stretch your comfort zone.

Post: #2

Experiment is inconclusive

Create a few more profiles of “models” with varying looks, rather than just this solitary, somewhat soy influenced model. Maybe your definition of “attractive male” is not what the general consensus is among the female population also. Ruggedness, despite sometimes not being aesthetically pleasing, is most certainly a metric that women tend to judge by, among other things.

Don’t discount the possibility that women who swiped left on this profile sensed they were stock images; a scam of sorts. I’m sure you get a sense for it when you see a chick who has nothing but professional looking photos. Not only that, but you get a feel for the location too i.e. if none of the pics were taken anywhere near your town/city (notwithstanding the ability to do a reverse image search). Womens’ intuition tends to be more refined than men’s too.

Despite your suspicions, there is quality to be had for mere mortals.

Post: #3

I think you need to edit this title to no one is banging 8's and 9's on Tinder. It is very possible to get laid from Tinder or similar apps. I've done so many times in a few different countries. I will give you that I can get higher quality in night game, but to outright say you can't find decent chicks to bang online is ridiculous in my opinion. Some of my best memories traveling have been with Tinder chicks.

Post: #4

He has model-like pics but he doesn’t look like a male model.

Post: #5

So much hate from butthurt guys who can't get results online recently on this forum, even from some veterans. Adapt or die, fact is the bang for buck off online game is much higher then nightlife. Congrats for banging a 6 after spending $100+ on a night out. I'll take the $100 I saved and get myself a nice steak dinner. Nor do I have time to walk around a mall for 4 hours to possibly get a few leads. 100 swipes? That's pretty small sample. Not to mention if this is New York, any non-white guys don't do well in NYC online dating. Now set your location to Manila and report back.

Pick what most girls consider male model material you'll have results like this: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthrea...=162407671

We get it. Your results suck online and you're jelly of other guys who are killing it online. Read up on a few threads, optimize your photos, and if you're not getting results than online is not for you. Stop polluting this forum with garbage snide comments like "be a man and approach in real life."

Post: #6

LOL at Putin Closes.

I don't do online game, except for a rare few times in the past.

I also rarely do night game.

I DO do day game.

Cost: $0.00.

Don't hate just because you lack the confidence to approach women in the flesh, bud. Get on my level, son.

Post: #7

The best thing, imo about meeting girls outside of online is the story that you get from it.

Especially with nightlife, you never know what the night will hold.

Post: #8

(01-04-2018 01:20 AM)Naughty By Nature Wrote:  LOL at Putin Closes.

I don't do online game, except for a rare few times in the past.

I also rarely do night game.

I DO do day game.

Cost: $0.00.

Don't hate just because you lack the confidence to approach women in the flesh, bud.

So you're just getting girls off the street to your place without spending any money? Right. If you want a dick measuring contest pm me your pics. Otherwise, let me know when you can bang multiple 6's in a week without wasting your whole day on the street. Time is money, well except for some people who apparently have all day to wander around and ask for directions. Notice that I don't go around the forum posting threads or posts such as: THE TRUTH of Day Game: Stop Wasting You're Time.

Post: #9

A friend of mine joked one should write HI in coke and use that as the profile pic.

I wonder how it will compare to the fake male model pics.

Post: #10

DELETE

Post: #11

I mean....that guy looks normal, just decent photos and bio is pretty shitty. Put 6'4, likes to travel, etc. and your results will change very fast.

There's plenty of guys getting laid off tinder tho. Heck, girls now go out and start swiping while they're out.

Post: #12

Newsflash: people are definitely getting laid off Tinder.
Sure, girls mostly use that app to quell boredom and get some validation while simultaneously window-shopping for Prince Charming / Chad Thundercock. But there are definitely some girls that are on that app that are willing to meet up, and fuck, guys like me and you.

Post: #13

I'm not doubting guys get laid online, but I believe Tinder and other online apps are mainstream and people talk about it, but they don't talk about how most guys get nothing from it. Also the majority of the time guys do fuck girls every so often, the girls are generally at least 2 points below the guy, and in countries like Aus/NZ the guys who get girls don't realise how attractive they are(and how gross/mediocre the girls are).

That being said, reading Corsega's thread and others I don't think anything's impossible. But it seems pretty rare to get a girl close to your level.

Edit: Also online dating really only seems broken in the west, so what I said above is from a western perspective

Post: #14

If you can't even make a decent looking fake profile with the ability to get any pics you want off the internet I can only imagine how bad you did on your own profile.

Post: #15

OP’s right but also wrong. One can get laid on online dating; however, it’s more than likely going to be with a girl noticeably worse looking.

The criticisms, however, are valid. A man who can only “approach” via online and not through cold approach is in serious trouble.

The ROI of online dating is terrible, though your average socially inept dude who hasn’t left the house in a week likely is fine with that.

Post: #16

People are definitely getting laid off tinder. But tbh the first pic in a tuxedo is good for facebook likes, but wont attract any women. In addition, the info text you used is really bad.

But yea, gaming outside is what makes the cojones grow.

Post: #17

You may have demonstrated that online game is low ROI, even though the bio is far from optimised and the sample size is quite small. You would really need to do a lot more than 100 swipes to begin to draw any definite conclusions though, and then your conclusions would only be relevant for the city you happen to be swiping in, as different cities can vary drastically even within the one country...Certainly I've had bangs from online and I'm less attractive than the guy pictured (although I've had much more success with okcupid than with tinder), and I'm gaming in a difficult city.

Even if the ROI could be proven to be 2/100 (assuming the fake profile bangs both his matches), that's not that much worse than day game statistics. Guys who are good at daygame get, I believe, something like 5/100 lay rate, and for a beginner it's probably going to be more like 0 or 1 out of 100. And this is with the expenditure of a great deal more time/effort than it takes to swipe right 100 times. I don't know the stats for nightgame, but in my experience it is much harder and lower ROI than online, with terrible gender ratios, cockblocking friends, logistical issues, and, in cases where you get the number, flaking. All in all, online game is in my view the most productive avenue for game in terms of easiness and access to quantity.

Post: #18

Don't forget that your swiping behaviour does also greatly influence how many matches you get on tinder. I am convinced tinder uses an internal ranking that defines which profiles turn up on your phone and on the girl's phone. Let's assume OP created that fake account and started swiping RIGHT 100 girls right away without any selection. His ranking started at neutral but after 100 swipes tinder classifies OP as "very desperate" and therefore only shows his profile to "very desperate" girls as well. Since there are barely such highly desperate girls in the west, OP will obviously get very few matches of which all of them are ugly no matter how you look.

However if you are very selective from the get go and only swipe, let's say, 10% of all shown profiles right your profile will be shown to selective hot girls who now have the chance to swipe you right.

Once your profile is shown to high quality girls, of course looks will eventually get you matches. But the point is to get to this stage firstly where you are even given the chance to match with desirable girls.

RedGuard

Post: #19

Dude what?

How did you manage to fuck up making a fake tinder profile for an experiment? Go replicate other tinder experiments and see for yourself. You could be anyone you want to be, look however you wanted, say whatever you wanted with zero real-world repercussions and you chose this? I'm fucking baffled.

The only thing I can think of is you set off to prove something before you conducted the experiment - going against scientific method; which is setting off to find truth. There's no way your game and knowledge of the world is this bad.

(01-04-2018 04:24 AM)RedGuard Wrote:  Don't forget that your swiping behaviour does also greatly influence how many matches you get on tinder. I am convinced tinder uses an internal ranking that defines which profiles turn up on your phone and on the girl's phone. Let's assume OP created that fake account and started swiping RIGHT 100 girls right away without any selection. His ranking started at neutral but after 100 swipes tinder classifies OP as "very desperate" and therefore only shows his profile to "very desperate" girls as well. Since there are barely such highly desperate girls in the west, OP will obviously get very few matches of which all of them are ugly no matter how you look.

However if you are very selective from the get go and only swipe, let's say, 10% of all shown profiles right your profile will be shown to selective hot girls who now have the chance to swipe you right.

Once your profile is shown to high quality girls, of course looks will eventually get you matches. But the point is to get to this stage firstly where you are even given the chance to match with desirable girls.

RedGuard

There's an elo ranking system, typically used for chess but they apply it to Tinder. Search around the forum and do some googling it's pretty well documented at this point. There are still nuances that people haven't worked out but it's mostly figured out by now.

Post: #20

(01-04-2018 01:36 AM)ms224 Wrote:  A friend of mine joked one should write HI in coke and use that as the profile pic.

I wonder how it will compare to the fake male model pics.

lol that's actually not a bad idea

Post: #21

So much male hamster. For a second I thought I was reading sluthate.

I often see this where a guy can't get laid from online dating and then it's not just about quitting Tinder, Bumble and all that for him and move on with his life and just shut the fuck up.
No, because he just desperately has to tell and convince all other men that they need to stop doing online game too, that they are wasting their time, how more alpha it is to approach girls in real life (and anyone doing online game is a beta) and that no one is ever getting laid with hot girls from online and if they do get laid it's always with an uglier girl.

But this isn't something most guys haven't already heard before, is it? Yawn.

I guess it would just be too hard for some to accept a reality where some guys just have it much easier than others.
Some guys can just flip a few text messages and be able to fuck new hot girls every week. A guy spending several hours a week on cold approaching is not supposed to know about that.

Post: #22

(01-04-2018 04:27 AM)Eugenics Wrote:  There's an elo ranking system, typically used for chess but they apply it to Tinder. Search around the forum and do some googling it's pretty well documented at this point. There are still nuances that people haven't worked out but it's mostly figured out by now.

I am aware there is such a ranking system but don't know the details. My post above is based on my own experience and may slightly differ from general assumptions about that ranking system. My point was that it is important to take your swiping behaviour into account on experiments such as OP has carried out.

Post: #23

I was scouted as an Abercrombie model when I was much younger, walking through London. 6'1, cleancut/wholesome/pretty boy kind of look. I'd say that if I'm in London, between bumble and Tinder I usually get 50-80 matches in a 24 hour period. Girls still flake like mad when the messages start, even the average looking ones. Plenty of girls on bumble don't message me when we do match.

Post: #24

I’m not on Tinder but have a buddy who still crushes it on tinder. Mostly younger latinas in their early 20s. He’s 35. It works, but there are variables. Geography might also have something to do w it.

Post: #25

TLDR : OP doesn't get laid online and wanted all of us to know that