Post: #1

I’ve been trying to think more generally about the problem “I don’t know any women who I would want to fuck who would also want me to fuck them”. I think that having a generalized model of this problem will help me better prioritize where I should be spending my energy.

I hypothesize that all game advice fits into the arrows on this diagram. Please run this through your BS detectors and tell me if this is wrong or missing something major.



I noticed the bottom two circles represent millions of women while the top one is much smaller. I wonder how many women exist that are in both bottom circles already. If you zoomed in on the huge bottom two circles I think it would look something like this:

Post: #2

"If this guy spoke to one cute girl on the street for every carefully planned line on that there chart??? He'd..." not need it.

Mostly kidding -- I love when concepts can be flayed out like this on paper.

Logically it makes sense that:

- meeting women means you know more women

- lower your standards, the more you'll want to fuck

- raise your value, the more they'll want to fuck you


What I see a notable absence of, is any kind of value-added "HOW" to:

- meet more women

- raise your value

- TAKE ACTION


This whole chart is blown to shit by the notion that action and balls can create attraction -- what about when an unknown, "invisible" guy steps to a girl who has not noticed him yet, has a confident greeting, gets her smiling and opening up, gets her wanting to fuck him? Great, he touched all three circles... now what?

Make a chart to map ACTIONS to things, if anything.

Actions should be granular (the things that lead up to meeting women, raising value, etc.).

Take the lower standards part out of it. Everything will basically fall into "raise value" and "put yourself out there"...



Sorry for feeding this everyone, but I have a soft spot for this kind of stuff ever since: https://uproxx.com/music/rap-song-lyrics...cs-charts/

Post: #3

Good that you thought about the interplay, but 100% agree with 456 that the next step should be how to take action to raise your value and expand your option set.

Post: #4

Thanks for the feedback. The rap charts were entertaining.

This doesn’t come from sitting around doing nothing. It comes from moving downtown in a big city, approaching a lot and getting a lot of numbers just to have them all fizzle out and go nowhere. Countless hours wasted contemplating text message strategy. The whole time feeling like some bigger picture thing must be wrong.

“action and balls” seem to create enough attraction to get numbers. But while trying to setup day2s, I cannot seem to hit a spot between “used car salesmen vibe” shutting the whole thing down, vs them just becoming indifferent to me and ignoring me. I get the feeling every women that I deal with in this city feels that better options are right around the corner.

I’ve been becoming more and more skeptical of “raise value” methods. I feel like I’m hitting the limits of progress with them. Most seem to demand faking your personality, long time commitments with minimal results, or being pushed out of your home country. Maybe I’m just getting older and less willing to change for people.

So what’s the moral of all this? I’m not sure. Maybe I’ll try to focus more energy on just meeting more women and not waste so much time on “value raising”. And maybe try to think of ways to screen the women I’m meeting more toward ones who would value me as-is and where-is.

Post: #5

The reason I like the idea of raising value is that - assuming you're doing the right things - you're improving your own life first, and those improvements just also happen to help you get girls.

For example if you get in great shape, start making a bunch of money, and are a cool person with some fun and neat stuff going on in your life, then your own daily experience of life will hopefully have improved. Like, your objective well being regardless of your success with women...and it just so happens that each of those improvements will probably make it easier for you to game more successfully too. It becomes harder for a girl to feel that there are "better options right around the corner" the better you become. You shouldn't have to fake your personality, commit long-term to stuff that's not giving you results, or necessarily leave your home country.

All improvements worth making take a lot work and planning, but given that you said that you have the balls to take action and that you took the time to think through and make those charts above, if you apply yourself you should definitely be able to find some areas where you can raise your value and your own happiness.

About your game...it sounds like you're able to get numbers and possibly first dates (good!), but you lose them sometime before you can set up a second meeting. You might want to figure out why that's happening and start working on your game from there - maybe try and be more fun and engaging. The girls I've lost in those circumstances have been because I bored them. Just keep plugging away at game while making efforts to improve your health/look, financial situation, and social life.

Post: #6

No prob --

Raising value = doing things FOR YOU, not for women. It's less about the acheivements that make you more attractive, it's that inner sense of accomplishment, internal locus of control and healthy self-pride that radiate sexiness.

Glad you went out and approached a lot. That experience teaches things words can't.

"Meeting more" is always a solid answer, agreed.

Here's the thing: I also understand the "used car salesman" vibe when you are texting some girl whose number you got, hoping she'll give a shit.

The way to avoid it: make a REAL connection with a girl, or else don't ask for the number.

To explain: say you approach 10 girls some evening, do it for the enjoyment and sheer ease of getting some smiles and opening girls out of their shell. Have zero expectations. Don't ask for numbers of the girls who seem to like you.

Instead, see how far you can get with either an instadate [hey I have another 30 to kill, want to grab a drink around the corner?] -- or make a plan for a day2 right there face-to-face [hey, we should do "this" again, you free Tuesday? we can ___."].

Even if she says no to the instadate, then you are primed to ask about "next Tuesday".

If she says yes to that, then you know she will respond to further comm after you get her number.

If she isn't that into it, just smile and say "well I had to try" with a confident DGAF smile.

The point is work with what you have in your actual face-to-face interactions. Don't see it as a ramp up to "getting digits".

It's a ramp up to "do I even like her personality? does she dig me? have we agreed to see each other again based on this chance encounter [which hopefully did not look like an obvious approach]?"

"Make the ho say no" or "get to a yes" are useful thoughts to have. Don't think about numbers.

Pretend any number you get that wasn't accompanied by verbal acceptance of plans before asking, will lead nowhere. Good experiment.

(05-06-2018 09:03 PM)Compendium Wrote:  Thanks for the feedback. The rap charts were entertaining.

This doesn’t come from sitting around doing nothing. It comes from moving downtown in a big city, approaching a lot and getting a lot of numbers just to have them all fizzle out and go nowhere. Countless hours wasted contemplating text message strategy. The whole time feeling like some bigger picture thing must be wrong.

“action and balls” seem to create enough attraction to get numbers. But while trying to setup day2s, I cannot seem to hit a spot between “used car salesmen vibe” shutting the whole thing down, vs them just becoming indifferent to me and ignoring me. I get the feeling every women that I deal with in this city feels that better options are right around the corner.

I’ve been becoming more and more skeptical of “raise value” methods. I feel like I’m hitting the limits of progress with them. Most seem to demand faking your personality, long time commitments with minimal results, or being pushed out of your home country. Maybe I’m just getting older and less willing to change for people.

So what’s the moral of all this? I’m not sure. Maybe I’ll try to focus more energy on just meeting more women and not waste so much time on “value raising”. And maybe try to think of ways to screen the women I’m meeting more toward ones who would value me as-is and where-is.

Post: #7

If the problem is lack of women willing to sleep with you then focus on screening of developing seduction skills. This is what is within your control. Forget the rest including diagrams and such.

Post: #8

Thanks guys.

456 Wrote:make a REAL connection with a girl, or else don't ask for the number.

I think lack of connection was my biggest missing piece. Long ago I was very good at this but for some reason have been completely ignoring it for the last few years. Since that post, I've been focusing more on connection and can tell women are much more responsive and interested.

Cipher Wrote:The reason I like the idea of raising value is that - assuming you're doing the right things - you're improving your own life first

Also a good point. Recently have been focusing more on internal-value and less on perceived-value and this also seems to be having a positive effect on how women perceive me.

Post: #9

This is a good post. In a general level.

@OP is talking theoretical game. So let's be theoretical.

Personally what I think is the whole point of game if you want to be successful: either by racking up notches or aiming for the highest quality.

You only need 2 things: which is meeting the women and increasing your value. I do not see the point of lower your standards. I guess that will only be good if you're aiming to break the Guinness world for most women bang notches in the world and avoid late night blue balls. At least on a personal level banging 2-3 HB9s beats banging 20 HB6s.

Post: #10

Yeah i think the original diagrams, while maybe helpful at some level, are flawed. They assume something like:
Female receptiveness = f(things that contain no randomness, don't change much over time, and are only related to "value")

Assuming a female receptiveness function like that causes you to judge your own value based on your interactions with women. Not only is that not helpful, it's also not correct. It also can lead to some initial randomness causing a downward feedback loop.

So what would female receptiveness look like if written as a Pure Function? What would the inputs be and what weights would each input hold? This is something I want to figure out for my own amusement whether its helpful or not.

A very vague and somewhat useless version could look like this:
Female receptiveness = f(
• female state
• perceived male state
• perceived environment state
• random number
)

I'd like to figure out something more comprehensive and figure out the weights of the inputs though. Just for my own amusement, not saying this is useful.