Invisibles, Dateables, Hot Guys | Krauser’s SMV Totem Pole
I have a million posts I want to write but I had a fresh idea today so I’m going to spit it out. It combines two bits of content that have inspired me. The timing of the post is based on a piece of writing from a guy I just came across that calls himself Red Coco. The second piece of inspiration is some thoughts from Krauser where he talks about how men are ranked in terms of Sexual Market Value (SMV). I am going to combine these concepts with some other themes that have been on my mind.
Here goes.
Let’s start with Red Coco’s post today:
“On a timeline, I would argue it is better to start off as a Beta and then grow into a learnt Alpha.”
— Red Coco
Now if that sounds like a controversial claim to you, I would agree. But I like it as a starting point for a conversion and I am using it as such.
As I see it, that is not a click-bait statement for Red Coco. He wrote an interesting piece about some of the value he has to offer that he attributes to his Beta days, and how he can access that value now as he transitions into being a player. He argues that he might not have achieved those qualities (or some of his insights into relationship dynamics) if he had started out “as a natural.” It’s a sincere piece and an uncommon POV. It’s worth a read.
I like a lot about what Red Coco wrote, but I disagree that we are better off starting out as Betas. Many (most?) of us will in fact begin the player’s journey there, by default. But I think there are handicaps to having ever spent time in the Beta-class of men.
But before I get into it, I want to transition into the material from Krauser.
I am in Tokyo now, just starting a daygame trip. Two years ago at this same time, I read Krauser’s book Adventure Sex. I never posted about it, but I took a lot of notes. It’s not a “textbook” (it’s a memoir), but Krauser is a natural teacher, and he works some lecture into his stories of sex on the sidewalk.
He had some notes on Sexual Market Value (SMV) that stuck with me:
“The pick-up community is obsessed with Sexual Market Value. This theory assigns men and women positions on a totem pole.”
— Krauser, Adventure Sex
In that section (the beginning of Chapter 32), he starts in about how we rank women and men. It’s the “1 to 10” scale for women. He works through the scale from 5s to 10s, doing a great job articulating his criteria for what a “7” is (“These girls are young and pretty enough to create a stir in your trousers so long as they look easy to catch”) or an “8” (“you’ll think ‘bloody hell, I can’t believe I’m fucking a girl this hot'”). Good stuff.
“Men naturally rank women into very fine gradations because that’s what we’re designed to do.”
Right. At least in the world of structured game, that is exactly how we talk about SMV. Not everybody agrees on what that scale means. There are different scales. But that is true enough.
Where it gets more interesting for me (and connects us with Red Coco’s theme) is where Krauser starts to talk about how women rate men:
“Women don’t rank themselves that way and when it comes to women rating men, they only really have three categories: invisible, dateable, and hot.”
That ^ is close to hitting the spot, well done.
If Krauser borrowed that from somewhere, let me know, but I’ve never heard that any place else. It’s not the groupings that are interesting, but more about the gaps between them (we’ll get to that later).
I had to look these quotes up for this post. In my head they were GAMMA/BETA/ALPHA. And I have another addition… TOP GUY. I’ll use my labels, because we already use these in Men’s Culture, but we’ll use Krauser’s definitions (because they are very good).
GAMMAs and the THE INVISIBLEs:
“The great mass of men are simply invisible, like furniture or cattle. They exist only to do the girl’s homework at college, help her with her shopping, fix a tyre, pay taxes, and defend the borders. Most men are nothing but pack horses, and thus sexually invisible. That’s not to say women harbour any ill intention towards them, they just treat them as non-sexual creatures, beasts of burden.”
Ouch. This hurts to read because it’s true. Most men are unfuckable. Maybe 80%. That’s harsh. But it’s true. It’s redpill to see that.
Let’s move on.
BETAs and THE DATEABLEs:
“Next, there’s a much smaller group, maybe fifteen percent of the male population, who are ‘good enough’ to date. These men have some readily observable value: reasonable height, decent looks, good job, decent fashion. If sex was all about checklists, these men’s resumes would get them an interview. They’re just uninspiring. When a girl really needs to get herself a boyfriend, she’ll consider one of these men if he can distinguish himself in some way, or if she just hangs around him long enough to grow to like him.”
Krauser is getting into value now, even as he is a bit shallow and surface-level about it.
But this is a category that hasn’t been described that often, actually. Which is significant, as most men studying game are fighting to get into this category. Most of my life, I was in this group, or trying to be.
I had a lot of relationships when I was younger. I am okay to look at, but certainly not “hot.” But I am smart, bold in some ways, reasonably athletic, very hard working, artsy. I had “observable value.” Girls wanted me for a boyfriend. And that worked pretty okay for me until I was over 30 and my social scene was smaller and girls didn’t fall into my orbit. At that point… I needed the skills to both approach and be attractive while doing so. I needed all that and more.
That is when I found game. And game helped me stay in this grouping… I was a “boyfriend” many more times as I was able to implement game.
And it wasn’t until I found game and really came to understand the Sexual Market Place that I realized that despite my series of happy relationships with girlfriends… I wasn’t really all that good with girls at all.
I didn’t know “what I didn’t know.” I was unconsciously unconscious. And when I realized I had a lot to learn, there was tremendous opportunity as I moved forward. It was daygame that gave me the arena to test my skill and push past the Beta/boyfriend stage.
(It’s a little early in the post, but while I’m at it… Viva Daygame.)
I like Krauser’s definition of this grouping of men. And I’ll expand it some:
Many active players live in what I might call the “VIP section” of the Beta/Dateable grouping. They are like the royalty of this class, above and beyond the rest, clearly distinct from the more average boyfriend/Betas.
If you’re approaching a lot (or engaging online successful), getting dates, making out, getting “one new lay per month,” you are like uber-boyfriend material in terms of SMP (you don’t have to want a relationship, we’re talking about what she sees). At this level, I would say you are “situationally Alpha,” but not Alpha at resting state. It’s your action that gives you some of the privileges of Alphaness… you have to work it.
I know “work at it” well. I am the “hardest working man in daygame” (© Nash 2019). That is not bragging, not at all. My hard work is your proof I’m not a “Hot” guy. If I was a proper resting Alpha, or a true Hot guy… I wouldn’t have to work nearly this hard. I am fine with all this. I’m doing great. But it’s true.
ALPHAs and HOT GUYS:
I think there is a level above this stage, but this is the last of Krauser’s categories as he presented them in his book:
“The ‘hot’ guys are somewhere between two and five percent of the population. They are somewhat attractive to most women, and each hot guy has his own demographic of women who finds him very attractive. The basis of their hotness is normally good looks, but it can also be fame, status, charisma, or lifestyle. The last five years of my life could be seen as a project to infiltrate this top-tier. For a while I bashed my head against the walls, then I’d get let in for short periods, and finally I made my home there.”
Proper Alphas… like you walk into the room and lots of people look at you. People follow your lead without a lot of arm-twisting. You get respect easily, and most importantly… you get sexual compliance. Not like “your GF lets you fuck her whenever you want”… but like your friend’s GF wants to fuck you. Waitresses write their number in your bill. Girls give up the number easily, return your messages consistently, and rarely flake for dates. This is the Chad state.
I bet most of the guys in this category are reasonably good looking AND have other “observable value.” (None of this has anything to do with cash. That is closer to a boyfriend trait, where she chooses you for the side-dishes you offer, not for who you are.)
I will venture into Bragging Country for a second and say I have had flashes of this stage. At least three times in 2018 I had solid Girl Tornadoes spinning (in Tokyo last year, that Spring when I returned home to the US, and again in Shanghai). I was approaching a lot. I had tons of active leads (adding new ones every day). I was dating a lot. I was fucking new and existing girls. I was “high” on game. And that made my vibe spiral up. The “Matthew Principle” kicked in, and because I already had “more,” I got “more.” Drunk on serotonin… everything I did worked better.
That ^ is the sexual life of a Hot Guy. Maybe it felt slightly better for me, as it was all conscious and intentional on my part (which is getting at Red Coco’s point, but hold on).
“If my vibe slips then my hold on the bottom rung of the Hot Guy ladder begins to slip too.”
Here ^ Krauser is saying something I know very well. For me, I was “Middle Dateable” most of my life. Game moved me closer to “Top Shelf Dateable.” I can fight my way into “Minor Hot Guy” status, but it is always temporary for me. Again I am okay with this.
Guys aren’t really on a “1 to 10” scale (more on why, in a minute). Girls will always like some guys more than others (even within the same category), of course, but I like Krauser’s “three buckets.” Like a lot of Krauser analysis, this matches what I see in my own “first hand” experience in the Sexual Market Place.
Cool. This is a great view into SMV.
That is the background I wanted to lay out before I go after Red Coco’s assertion that we might all be better in the end if we started off as Beta.
“On a timeline, I would argue it is better to start off as a Beta and then grow into a learnt Alpha. When you come from a bad place – like being a fat kid – then you hope to never return there. And when you do inadvertently return there, you know the surrounds, the vibe, the feeling of being there…”
— Red Coco
I really like his post. It’s an unusual perspective in a community where most perspectives are well-worn with repetition.
As for that line that we would be better off starting out as Betas, it’s sort of a moot point, as most of us will be Beta (or worse) anyway. So maybe his POV has practical value even if I don’t like the assertion I highlight here.
Anyway… he says he wrote his piece as he sees a natural friend of his struggling with relationship management:
“I write this because my neighbour is a natural Gamer.. he recently embarked on a relationship with a Spanish girl and has the face of a man who does not know how to navigate the polarity required to keep her in orbit but not lose his own trajectory. He doesn’t know what it’s like to slip into a long-term relationship, how to deal with frame weakening, and what it’s like banging the same chick over and over again.”
I see what Red Coco is aiming at. And I know he is trying to develop a larger point, but I think he is conflating his neighbor’s “surface attraction skills” with a man that “really knows women.” There is a difference between being able to “begin deals” and being able to manage them. It is not only a different experience, but also a difference in mindset.
Krauser’s SMV scale for men isn’t really about managing girls. That’s not it’s focus, it’s a more simplistic scale than that. But this is an interesting point to jump-off into the characteristics that I think Red Coco is pointing to… that is, real understanding of relationship dynamics, women, and female psych.
And I think we can tie those qualities back to SMV categories as well. I think they are correlated.
I was originally going to comment on Red Coco’s blog that the scale of “Gamma/Beta/Alpha” as it pertains to SMV is not a spectrum. This is the point that Krauser adds to that scale that I think is particularly interesting:
“It’s tempting for a would-be player to obsess about microlevel changes in his value, as if upgrading himself from a 7.4 to a 7.6 will affect his sex life. That’s a fallacy based on projecting the male 1-10 system onto women. The real challenge for a player is to jump from invisible to dateable, and then dateable to hot guy. There are only two thresholds to cross and it means the difference between involuntary celibacy and a steady girlfriend, then from a girlfriend to lots of adventure sex.”
— Krauser
This ^ is a hot concept. Very well done. And this is what I couldn’t forget after I read it. Excellent.
He is talking about a “JUMP.” That’s not an “optimization” or “tuning” of your SMV. It’s not “inching your way up”… it’s a QUANTUM LEAP. And I think that is a very important point in understanding SMV.
Women CAN be “incrementally” better than others, in that “bigger tits” or a “better smile” can make us more interested and hustle a bit harder. The game of seduction is on us, so the primary drivers of making it work are on us, not the girls. So marginal gains by girls might inspire us. But as it’s on us to start the game, those bits about women aren’t essential. If a woman can follow a man’s lead, the game can begin… even if the surface rewards for a man are +/- a point or two in one direction or another.
But for a man, there are QUANTUM LEVEL skills that can’t be “almost-ed.” There is no “close” in masculinity. There is no “close” in being a leader. You can’t be “almost convincing” when it comes to her spreading her thighs.
This is why the classic Beta/Alpha thing is so persistent. Those “jumps” as Krauser calls it make the all the difference. They are distinct categories, not small tweaks. If you can make the jump… you can have the rewards.
This is why many very attractive men can get a girlfriend, but can’t create choice with women on the fly. They are surface hot, but lack the real drivers that really successful men possess. It is why men with money can find a girl that will spend time with them (sometimes), but it doesn’t at all mean they will “get what they want” from those women. Those men become cash-machines for gold diggers (some of them in the context of marriage) and get worked over.
Hooking the girl – through good looks or cash – is a weak start, unless you have the skills to manage her psychology once you have her. Catching a snake is one thing. Enjoying it without being bitten is quite another.
So back to Red Coco.
He does a great job of acknowledging some of the “side dishes” associated with wrangling women. How accumulating various kinds of value can make you more attractive on the front end, but also can add depth in the context of a long-term relationship.
I hear him saying that men that have been in the “boyfriend box” a few times know what it’s like to feel a girl chip away at a man’s frame. They can see the warning signs. They might have some skills in detection, if not control. A lot of that is true.
I know what that is like in my own life.
In the last 10 years I had two serious girlfriends where I lived with both of them (very briefly). They chipped away, despite my education in game. I could see it. I could deflect some of it, counter other parts, shock-and-awe her back into my frame… but the “betatization” of relationships is real. I wasn’t able to hold it back with those girls. And as I wasn’t that into them (and particularly that behavior), I chose to get out. My education and my frame weren’t quite what they needed to be… but I was wise enough to know I use boundaries to get back to a good place, a place I knew I could be happy(er)… which was single.
It wasn’t hard. I ended those relationships, got free, got happy. As the song goes… there are 50 ways to leave your lover.
But Red Coco is talking about a skillset that works within the context of an LTR. And I admire that investigation. Which is why I wrote this post.
Red Coco explores the idea that starting Beta can prepare you to function more successfully in longterm relationships. I was inspired by his thinking, but no… I don’t think that is true.
I don’t think being Beta helps, precisely because of the those QUANTUM LEAPS between categories. Those leaps are based on skills and qualities that the previous category fundamentally does not possess. The differences define the categories themselves.
Beta’s learn a lot of bad habits that are hard to shake off. So starting there… will mean it takes years to get even middling success, as you “leak” Beta and girls can smell it, instantly disqualify you. Those Beta-tells push you down a quantum category… back to Beta… and barely fuckable, if fuckworthy at all.
We see this as otherwise “cool players” hook a girl, but they “like her too much,” and they stop running good game. That is a Beta-tell. That is a bad habit of a man that spent too much time in Beta Country and slips back into those patterns in moments of weakness. Once she see Beta… you don’t lose “a point,” you lose a whole leap of status. You’re busted from hero back down to Beta, and then… it’s gets worse and quickly.
For contrast, I’ll tell a story of an old friend of mine. We’ll call him The General.
The General is a piece of work (an imperfect man), but he is not the slightest bit Beta. He can’t imagine thinking that way. He is packed with flaws and many women would laugh at him, but he has always had tremendous control of women, access to women, he can make it happen (not with every woman, but with some girl) any time, any place. He is a proper Natural. He is the same way in business. This goes beyond surface level qualities of “catching” a prospect (be it a woman or a business client). The General is successful on the front end and also has the management skills and behavioral traits that cannot be faked, traits that hold together long-term success.
The General can display HONEST SIGNALS that are proof to many around him that he is in the category of ALPHA, even if he is not particularly Hot Guy. He is a bit short, bald, and kind of fat. But, he can pull with the volume of Hot Guy (if not the quality, but sometimes there too). And then he can run laps around guys that can only attract, as he is a natural Alpha and can control women via his own psychology and knowledge of theirs.
He is also a bit of tyrant. And I think that actually, totally serves his marriage. I have a side-theory that tyrants have the best marriages. Tyrant + restraint + benevolence, that’s the formula. I’m speculating, I’m not married… but that is how you keep the betatization process at bay. But I digress.
I don’t think most Beta’s will ever learn to be like my friend. Not even close. When they try, they will look like they are LARPing (= playacting and incongruent), and they’ll get rejected (rightfully so), or have short-terms gains that don’t serve them or their girls in the long-term.
Much better to start Alpha (which is not a choice for most guys, so this is theoretical) or… come from a family with an Alpha father (or an Alpha culture, etc) that instills this kind of Alpha thinking in you, so you default back to it (based on your upbringing)… even in hard times.
Now I’ll hat-tip to Yohami.
Yohami introduced the concept of TOP GUY to me here in this blog. Top Guy (as I see it) is a fourth category for male SMV I would add to Krauser’s totem pole. It’s above and beyond “hotness” (with that label, Krauser clouds the water a bit).
“Hotness” sounds like physical attractiveness, which is almost meaningless for a guy like me. He adds charisma, fame and lifestyle, but again, not good enough for what gives a man “hand” in a relationship. If you need to spend your time talking about how it’s all about hotness or looks, I think you’re a serious “junior leaguer” and I can’t be bothered to try to convince you otherwise (Full disclosure: I wasted some time doing that this week, and I’m bitter about it).
Looks help… yeah, yeah, yeah. Super boring, low-fidelity point. Swagger (an Alpha trait) trumps looks by a wide margin. A good looking Beta isn’t nearly as attractive as a less “hot” guy with serious swag. And above looks and swag is applied psychology. Mindset, yeah… which is byproduct of a man’s psychology. The player’s own psych (“inner game”) is crucial for Top Guy. And his knowledge of the intricacies of the minds of women.
Top Guy is all that. Looks are almost irrelevant for Top Guy. His swag and his insight into the churning gears of the SMP are what take him beyond hero (let’s say, a relatively successful PUA) into Super Hero – a man that not only has choice upfront with women, but can wrangle them once he has dragged them into his world.
I am no expert in Top Guy. I have had “Top Guy” moments, as I talked about above. When Krauser says he has fought his way into “Hot Guy” category, I think he is saying he has learned some aspects of the life of Top Guy (certainly more than me).
And I think most Top Guys are born, not made (most of them). Even if those skills lay dormant and never “activate their potential.”
Others are made. Like Yohami. I believe that he is Top Guy and wasn’t always. He says so.
I think I have had flashes of Top Guy… because Yohami schooled me so hard (he molded my psychology), and because I have APPLIED IT (this is not about memorizing theories). I have endlessly more to learn. But I make the jump up into Top Guy (always temporarily), particularly when I am working hard and have tons of options (and the Daygame Gods will it so). And then I slip back down into a productive Sigma lifestyle for most of the rest of the time.
Being Beta will never give you Top Guy insight. So you will essentially fight fires (or distract the girl from setting them), but never deal the root cause. She will fuck with a Beta. And fuck with him more aggressively every time he shows his “Bottom Guy” nature.
This was a big part of what Yohami was trying to teach. When you flash Bottom Guy at her… you drop down a quantum leap and you are really in trouble. A lot of the tools you learn in that phase of your life are half-baked recipes that highlight ingredients, but are really… nothing at all. And she knows it. So she works you out of your job (and her life).
It’s how nature intended it to be.
Being Beta may give you insight/motivation that will help you strive to actuate Top Guy… but anything remotely Beta, is the antithesis of Top Guy. Those worlds don’t coexist well at all.
To make it personal again… I don’t know that I could ever run a proper marriage. Perhaps as I have too much in my Beta past. I can run very solid relationships these days, full ROMANTIC REDPILL, but the best tool I have when things get rough is cut it off and start over. Short of that, I control a lot of the negotiation these days by controlling my time (I don’t give her too much), which means anything domestic is out.
I don’t want The General’s life, but I really admire the mettle of that man. He is a traditional guy, one that has had a ridiculously hedonistic backstory, but settled down, and now runs a business, raises two boys, and wrangles his wife (including keeping their sex life functional… which is almost all him, it’s amazing… no way a Beta could do what that man does).
And based on both genetics and his influence, I bet his son’s will have a better shot at Top Guy relationships than most. And certainly more than aspiring Beta’s can hope to know.
The game is played in psychology. And you learn each lesson via your own personal reference experiences. You can’t even begin to earn those reference experiences as an invisible Gamma (you can’t get girls to play). And Betas and The Dateables can earn reference experiences, but often the wrong ones. They learn what it is like to be seen as “high functioning” Beta. That is still a flavor of Bottom Guy.
No, I don’t think starting Beta has many advantages.
Alpha is the place to start (as Yohami would insist), as all of your incoming references are as a man that is seen and treated as Alpha. You learn the right habits… right from the beginning. You always see yourself from the right POV. And so do the girls.
May we all find the balance, the balls, and the boldness to inspire women to see us as Alpha (even if that is concentrated into the limited time we are with those girls). And if we’re good… tastes the fruit of the Top Guy lifestyle. It is from that “upward spiral” that the world opens up.
Until then… may the sidewalk be full of inspiring lovely girls. May the interactions be spicy. May we all be entertained.
Viva Daygame.
You are right to add a fourth category, as Krauser is silly to consider himself in the top category of men. The top category does not have to work hard to get laid.
The following are signs that someone is a a top guy:
– You get tons of IOIs: eye contact/smiles/girls blatantly check you out
– Girls go out of their way to be close to you
– Girls introduce you to their friends/take snaps/IG stories and pictures of you as a way of boosting their own status
– Almost all women want you to fuck them without a condom
– Women on apps will send you nudes unprompted
– Women routinely call you “handsome”, “hot”, “beautiful”, “gorgeous”, “yummy”
– Most importantly, sex becomes a collaboration between you and her instead of a battle of constantly overcoming difficulties she gives you
Pretty much no one reading this blog will ever experience any of these, nor will I. But I have been around multiple top guys (“Chads”), I have seen their phones and texts, and how girls treat them, and these experiences are all commonplace for guys in that tier.
Anyway, it’s silly to work on achieving this tier as you can only get there with the top 5-10% of looks and/or top 5% of status. But it is fascinating to be around.
We should all be focusing on getting to the top of the third tier.
I think that is a good list of “symptoms” a Top Guy will experience while walking around.
However, I think you overplay looks and what he receives.
I am very interested in SwingCat’s view that “receiving” is a feminine strategy. Penetrating is masculine behavior.
A lot of what you’re you’re pointing to could be true for a gay male model, where he sits back and receives offers from (often masculine) girls… that don’t know he’s gay, so it’s much ado about nothing. I don’t think that guy is Top Guy at all. He’s just hot. He could be dork, but a hot one, get offers.. that go nowhere, even if he’s straight.
Dumb, hot, fuck toy can never be Top Guy.
Top Guy to me is about insight. You can definitely be Top Guy and be in the 70th % for looks. Maybe lower than that.
Top Guy can wrangle women.
He approaches (or just orders coffee, or whatever), he “swings his dick” as Yohami would say. Maybe he’s not good looking, so she has a mild or dismissive reply…
But then HIS 2nd move is where he shines. He says/does something and she gets it.
She is like, “Ooooooooo. He’s Top Guy. I get it.”
And HIS 3rd move is, “Yes, that’s right,” with a cocky smile (or it IS the cocky smile). Game on.
Top Guy isn’t passive. He does get offers, but probably as many from his behavior as his looks. It’s what he does with those offers.
Even if he’s very hot, it’s what he does next that really makes her eyes pop open. This is behavioral. I am completely dismissive of looks. Combined with game, fuck yeah. Without game… almost useless. Like a big gun with no bullets and no finger on the trigger.
It’s Top Guy’s insight, and how he translates that into frame and action that make him strictly 1-2% of the population.
Sure. I guess that’s why I refer to my top tier as “Chad” and not “Top Guy”. My top category is about what you receive, and not what you do with it.
Chad works for me.
For Alpha/Top Guy/Chad… in all cases, I’m interested in what I can do, what I can see, how I can be effective. Those skills are actually what defines the categories for me.
A well paid SALESMAN makes “$150k”, lets say. But the sales guy is not “$150k.” That is his reward. A byproduct of something else. What he is, is a man that sells so well he is recognized for his ability.
I think that is the way to think about it. And you don’t aim for “$150k.” You aim to sell so well, that people will recognize you for it. And you’ll likely end up well beyond $150 if you reach mastery. And have lots of other rewards as well.
Hey Nash,
I’m going to supplement Pancake’s comment. I know perhaps more than my fair shair of guys who fit the description of girls dripping wet on first sight and going out of their way for them.
My personal trainer friend who fucked 100 girls off bumble/tinder in one year – I wouldn’t say he has good game – not by a long shot. He has a good, confident vibe which I guess he’s been able to develop from a lifetime of being really good looking (6’4, 205 pounds, 6% body fat).
He is incapable of cold approach, he has told me he can’t unless the girl eye fucks him twice. Every time I go to a bar with him, at least a couple of girls well over the 8 threshold go up and talk to him.
This happend on Friday night, where a legit 9 walked into the place with no less than 6 orbiters. Her first move was to eyefuck him then sensually caress his arm as she walked by. What’s more, he was with his girlfriend.
I’d say this is common in American/Anglo culture. Todd Valentine and Roosh V (the crazy one) have said the same thing.
And my friend’s stats back this up. He’s told me on a first date with an American girl, 90% chance of the lay. With a European or Asian, 50%. THe reason being – he leaves all the escalation to the girl. This goes back to having good vibe but no game – game requires the ability to take a risk by trying to take things to the next level. Girls outside the Anglosphere expect game. Within it, if you meet a certain looks or status threshold, girls won’t give a flying fuck.
He is but one example, I knew many men like this going to school at USC and even to a lesser extent with the head of accounts at my company.
Sir. If you’re one of these guys, great. If you’re not… who gives a shit about those guys. We cannot “learn” to be super hot… so that is a dead end, and I treat it as such. If you care about changing YOUR LIFE, it is a distraction every time we bring that up in the context of game.
— Some guy was born RICH. He still has money. So what.
— Some guy was NOT born rich. Now… he has lots of money. Better story.
How do guys that are NOT in that class develop their sexual lives? If it is impossible, we are all shit out of luck. But it is NOT impossible. And everyone here knows that. So that is where I put my focus.
What impresses me are men that can create similar action using something other than looks. And then, wrangle women with style and grace. That is where the leverage is.
An EXCEPTION would be a man like JANKA… great example. Very good looking… but much more than that. He has insight. He EARNED that insight. That I care about. I can learn from Janka.
I don’t know if I believe that all that many guys get a girl hot and bothered with looks alone. And even if a guy is super hot, most women WILL NOT approach him–they’re too shy.
It’s that whole aggression vs. receiving aspect. Yes, anyone with game knows women will chase–and indeed we want them to chase–but it has to be prompted by something first, and that is almost always on the guy to make happen.
Game trumps looks every time–I mean, to use myself as an example, I’ve always been a pretty good looking guy, but my n-count was 13 before I learned and applied game this year–now it’s 27. And admittedly, I’m still learning a ton and can get a lot better than I am now. I stay in shape, but by and large I’m no better looking now than I have been most of my life. The difference is game. On top of that, all the Chads I’ve known in my life had game, but not all of them were really good looking guys.
So while I think it’s fun for guys to tell stories about dudes who walk into a room and every girl spreads her legs and submits upon his entrance–99.9% of the time that’s just bullshit. Plus it’s super slutty and as we all know, one thing a woman almost NEVER wants to do is be seen as a slut.
Overall, I really enjoyed the post. I feel you on the argument about looks–my friends attribute my success purely to looks and refuse to believe that it’s the game that made the difference. I try to convince them that if they learn cold-approach they can do this too, but that’s the excuse they always come back to.
To me, that’s the real takeaway for why cold approach pick-up is #1 when it comes to learning game and attaining value with women–because that is exactly what an alpha top guy would do. He sees a woman he’s interested in and talks to her, not in a needy, fawning way, but in a way that says, “a lot of women fuck me–want your turn?” It’s also why I think guys stunt themselves when they rely on Bumble or Tinder; you didn’t have to do any work, and the very fact you’re on a dating app says you’re needy and don’t have a reliable stable of girls or place to find them.
Additionally, I have a hard time seeing an Alpha/Top Guy scanning through his phone for a couple hours a day swiping, texting back and forth, and navigating all the bullshit–because if we’re honest, no matter how good looking you are on SOD (swipe/online dating), some women flake, ghost, or waste your time with texting and bullshit.
With cold approach, you’ve already established your frame and alpha status with the girl, because you picked her up and it worked (if you got the number). You’re also demonstrating pre-selection and working dread because she’s going to assume you do this with other women too (girls always ask if I’m a player, and after a few dates, ask if I’m fucking other girls). Finally, there’s already a story–you met at a bar or coffee shop or randomly on the street or at a grocery store–and a story is one of the things that will get you laid, along with high status (already demonstrated), and being the last dick standing (if you’re on a date, that’s on you). I think it was Todd V who said that, but I’ve found having a story to be incredibly powerful–girls love to talk about the first time you met them.
Anyway, game is above looks, and the number 1 thing to learn in game is cold approach IMO. Cheers!
Love this article and you clearly know what your talking about AND you have a logical and pragmatic approach to this. Which led to me re-reading bits of your article with mind-blowing revelation.
Suffice to say, I am on your side and agree with 99% of what you say.
The only issue is I smell a hint of jealousy / envy towards good looking guys (model-tier Chads that pancake mouse spoke about). I think this envy is clouding your judgement and allowing emotion to overtake logic – namely because you don’t want it to be true that good looks can really be a golden ticket to sexual Valhalla.
I was in that same boat. And as much as it’s painful to see, I can’t rationalize against what my own two eyes have seen. I have befriended “Chads.” I have seen first hand the disgusting amount of super hot girls that throw themselves at them. The messages they get on their phones. The way girls look at them and, for that moment, nothing else in the world exists except Chad in all his beautiful glory. Women will be very forgiving of any beta transgressions Chad may perform. They will be very forgiving of any stupid thing that comes out of his mouth – in fact, they will even choose to view it as cute / funny / quirky.
Basically take an adjective, and it can be spun in a positive light when it’s a starstruck woman describing Chad. He can literally “do no wrong.”
Is it better to be a Chad than a learned alpha with all the right phycological skillsets? Who knows, that’s probably more of a philosophical debate. Is it better to be a bored king sitting full on ennui on his golden throne, or is it better to be a hard-working self-made upper-middle class person?
It worries me that I have a strong point of disagreement with you, as I love your writing and I truly think you are on the upper echelon of knowledge in this field. And this means one of us is totally wrong about the power of Chads / top-tier good looks and we need to go back to the drawing boards on our theories.
Nope. I am jealous of Roy Walker. He may be “Super Hot,” but that’s not what he is known for. Roy… is very GOOD with women. I don’t want to be hot (a little boy’s wish). I want to be a master of women. They are only barely related (EX: The General).
We know Roy is ACTIVE (=something you can control). And likely INSIGHTFUL (=can be learned). And BOLD (=can be learned). And he can LEAD (=can be learned). These are characteristics I care about.
Can you see a pattern in what I am pointing to?
Can you control how Chad-Hot you are? No? Then why do you focus on it? That is the definition of ineffective. I have very little patience with “game is about being hot.” Dead boring.
Q: Of the men you know that are good with game, really good, they can spin plates… how many of them talk about looks?
No, I have no doubt that many Hot Guys have tons of sex. Again, dead boring to me.
WYCLEF: “You’re looking at my watch, but my mind’s really the diamond.”
I am talking about TOP GUY, not “surface hot” guy. When men talk about looks, I can quickly tell they are not ready to get better with women. That is their excuse to suck.
Chad may have something I can learn, but I don’t think about Chad’s good looks at all. Not for a minute. And that gives me more free minutes to get better with girls. THIS is my point. Or 1/2 of my point.
I think you might have misunderstood my focus in this piece. I am not talking about “who would win in a fight, Godzilla or Mighty Mouse.” You’re correct, Philosophical, and not in a direction that inspires me… or helps me PENETRATE THE WORLD OF WOMEN.
The trust of my piece was about MOVING UP IN SMV. And about the POTENTIAL OF TOP GUY, and psychological mastery with women.
I don’t give a shit about how Hot Chad is… his hotness won’t teach me a thing.
>>Q: Of the men you know that are good with game, really good, they can spin plates… how many of them talk about looks?
It is still a good idea to improve your looks.
Quit sugar.
Focus on eating protein.
Learn how to lift.
Sort out your fashion / haircut / etc.
These are all pretty simple to execute, though a LOT of guys don’t do them. Including a lot of guys who are in or want to be in the game.
Build value + deliver value. The guys who do really well appear to do both.
First of all… when you take advice from a man, it is sometimes good to know which man you’re listening to, and how that helps you understand his advice.
If you don’t know TheRedQuest… this guy is a very high value guy (his life is on track), high n count (if that matters to you), wrote a book on Sex Clubs, etc, etc. He is very, very good with women.
So he has so much of game covered, he can dip back into having low body fat, etc.
But believe me… this is not what makes TheRedQuest extraordinary (and he is extraordinary). And it has very little to do with what separates from other men.
I wish he had made that point instead… as he has the experience to point to most men that have “quit sugar” cannot even imagine.
…
And as for you, TheRedQuest… Sir… I think you do men reading this a disservice, as you bring the conversation down to “surface characteristics.”
That is what they want to hear. So they can not try. So they can retard their own growth.
“Oh, I can’t be good, because “looks matter.”
We can’t get them to move on with their own education, with what really fucking matters… when they are still focused on their % body fat.
And I see that you focused on aspects of looks they can improve. Which is a distinction… at least you pointed to “surface” aspect they can control. Those things can help (in very small ways, in the bigger picture).
But, if they focus there… they will always suck with girls.
How many guys with above average body fat in the Sex Club scene do you know that have tremendous relationships with women? Not %, but examples. I bet you know a LOT of examples of guys that eat sugar, carry some weight, and slay it with girls. And why? Because what they are doing at the psychological level is infinitely more powerful than knocking 3% pts of their body fat.
Lean, does NOT equal good with women. Fit, does NOT equal good with women.
Let’s step this conversation up.
We are hurting men who can’t see the bigger picture when we feed their “first base” understanding of a “home run.”
I just want to add that two of my three best friends since high school are model type perfect good looks prep-school-finest-in-new-england types that are very outgoing as well. The third was a powerlifting and football champ in Highschool and super outgoing and tough – the only beta tell is he was a minor braggart. These guys soak up all the attention in the room the moment they walk in. They all got laid like tile, or did when they were young. One of them led me to the early days (SoSuave?) PUA forums – which I dismissed, ‘I don’t need that’ I thought at the time.
And they all have suffered endless drama and heartache. They pedestalize the wrong women and try to wife up the wrong women and end up just as wrecked and lonely – maybe more so – than I have.
One is a hermit, living alone on an island with no cell phone, maybe a dial up connection for internet. His post wall native american gf with several adult kids (by others) and grandkids left him and went back to the res a year or so back.
One finally drank himself to death this past year. His wife who divorce raped him and turned his son against him was bulimic (you can’t imagine the dental bills) and was hospitalized several times after the divorce, apparently she had a psychotic break or three. My friend was clueless and blindsided. After the divorce he tried to save a stripper, and it got worse from there. His last live in gf was the only female sociopath I ever met. Getting rid of her involved restraining orders and moving and changing phone #s &c.
Friend number three is doing the best, but basically he screws the worst sort of girls, then fails with every girl he really likes because he pedestalizes them.
No matter what looks you were born with, you need game.
Excellent post
“I am very interested in SwingCat’s view that “receiving” is a feminine strategy. Penetrating is masculine behavior.”
Yohami used a penis and vagina metaphor to explain this somewhere on Riv’s blog. In terms of escalation and ramping. Something about how the vagina gets soft when aroused, and the penis gets hard, and the vagina prepares to receive the cock, and then the cock penetrates..
He used that to explain how arousal of the girl is getting her soft in someway (rubbing her pussy), for your ramping up (thrusting). And how that’s the whole dick swinging and escalation thing.
Now, let me that say that i absolutely enjoy these posts where you take time out in between Lay/Date Reports to do a bit of “mind wank”. Where you attempt to ground the theories in your personal experiences and see how they fit.
“He used that to explain how arousal of the girl is getting her soft in someway (rubbing her pussy).”
I am really interested in this… for coincidental reasons.
I have been going on on Twitter lately about “LMR,” using David Deida quotes to think about how to do better there.
And this guy said “just do more comfort.” And that was a boring, lo-fi answer to me. Yes… but that’s too vague to be interesting to me at this stage.
And Yohami had taught me to do more than just “escalate,” but to concentrate on her arousal. Which was a great lesson, and it got me to “tune into” something more deeply. Helped me a lot.
I don’t think “rub her pussy” is the way to soften her. That IS about arousal. Which is great. But imagine her, slightly tight jawed, her hands in little “fists,” and you’re trying to rub her pussy. She might let you do it. It might turn her on… but I think we are bypassing “soft” when we go that route.
When you use the word “soften,” this is where I am at now. How can I get her to soften. I’m off on a tangent now, but this is one of the most important parts of game to me. It is not easy to arouse a girl that is not already “soft” in some way. And how much more aroused would she be if she was extra “soft” to you?
And I think we can imagine this on a street pickup. How do we soften her there too, so the pickup can “penetrate” there as well. And imagine a stiff date… how to soften her there??
This is more than just familiar (although, she probably won’t become sexually familiar unless you can soften her). It’s a deeper trust. Again, “just ‘do’ comfort” is too blunt for me in this area. Softening her is the thing.
Interesting. I am focused here. It is my current theme.
The one glaring difference between Top Guy a la Yohami, someone like Krauser is one of them Daygames and mass approaches women.
The other emphasizes being the center of a social circle and from there you can pick women in your circle and escalate, or you can have the women who see you and your circle from outside and want to join your tribe.
The traits Pancake has listed there:
“”””
The following are signs that someone is a a top guy:
– You get tons of IOIs: eye contact/smiles/girls blatantly check you out
– Girls go out of their way to be close to you
– Girls introduce you to their friends/take snaps/IG stories and pictures of you as a way of boosting their own status
– Almost all women want you to fuck them without a condom
– Women on apps will send you nudes unprompted
– Women routinely call you “handsome”, “hot”, “beautiful”, “gorgeous”, “yummy”
“***
Are only things a situational alpha will get. Because he already has social proof, the women know he is top guy and want to be part of his tribe.
The last trait Pancake mentions:
“”””
– Most importantly, sex becomes a collaboration between you and her instead of a battle of constantly overcoming difficulties she gives you
“”””
can only happen cus she already wants you, before you even noticed or said a word to her.
What separates Attractive Guy from Top Guy here, is Attractive Guy is winging it, and Top Guy knows game (understands what arouses women) and knows what he is doing, as you’ve said – added to the fact that she already wants him, there’s little chance she’ll put up any walls.
“She already is attracted to you and wants you, before you even noticed or said a word to her”
This would almost never happen daygaming. In daygame, we’re wheeling around her out of nowhere (which is why guys who wait for some form of IOI before approaching are doing something correct) and the first thing we say is “I just saw you and think you look nice..” – it is a literal chase, followed by a free compliment.
Every thing else we say from that point could raise our value, as you’ve mentioned. But it doesn’t change that we are starting from a place where she wasn’t already attracted to us.
To clarify, the reactions that I listed don’t always have to be social status and situational alpha. A guy can get these via cold approach (daygame/nightgame/online) simply by being extremely physically attractive.
Don’t agree.
And I’ll give you the same challenge I gave Yohami. If you have a certified Top Guy, and he goes daygaming (“picks up girls via cold approach during the day”), what happens?
Girls get picked up. Period.
It is a few moments longer than your first scenario. He still has some rejection, that is normal. I don’t think that rejection matters much (his frame is not that fragile).
TOP GUY: Hey…
HER: [oh, it’s some guy…]
TOP GUY: [a top guy move that surprises/impresses her]
HER: [wow, this is not what I thought it was]
TOP GUY: [a top guy move that surprises/impresses her]
HER: OMG
TOP GUY: [a top guy move that surprises/impresses her]
HER: OMG
etc
The situational aspect is basically strong PR for Top Guy, that’s it. He doesn’t need it (if he really needs it, he’s not Top Guy). You wouldn’t have that situational status if you didn’t have the skills. And if you have the skills, you don’t need the status.
The situation is a distraction for most men, as they won’t have those few “kingships” (being a rockstart, CEO, club promoter, etc) so I disqualify that as useful information. For most men, it is not useful. Next idea.
Cold approach is a delivery vehicle for VALUE (Top Guy skills are certainly value). If you have that kind of VALUE, daygame will help display it.
The risk is only in accumulating too much negative feedback. Which again, for Top Guy… is not a relevant risk.
“””
Beta’s learn a lot of bad habits that are hard to shake off. So starting there… will mean it takes years to get even middling success, as you “leak” Beta and girls can smell it, instantly disqualify you. Those Beta-tells push you down a quantum category… back to Beta… and barely fuckable, if fuckworthy at all.
“””
I think this is sport on.
And Daygame leaves one susceptible to this by the very fact that we’re approaching her.
Approaching her to give a compliment first has one in a lower value starting point. Every minor screw up here just further reduces our value, than the situational top guy position where she already sees us being the life of the party, or the one everyone else in the group is orientated around.
Wonder how approaching in a museum goes for Nash, as opposed to approaching on the street.
TRUE/FALSE: A high value man can go for what he wants and get it?
Disagree. A high value man that approaches a women is not lower status. He is going for what he wants. If Top Guy see a girl he likes, and she doesn’t notice him… does he say, “ah… I guess I’ll doing nothing and wait until she picks me.” Of course not. That is fragile ego, passive, feminine POV.
A lot of guys that overplay the “don’t approach” are trying to preserve bragging rights about conversion rate. It’s bullshit. I reject it.
Yes… it would be best if girls lined up to fuck you, and you could choose the best one. Your game would be better in that scenario. And your serotonin would be off the charts.
And when that is not available, then what?
Meanwhile, TEAM COLD approach IS dating/making out/fucking girls.
More importantly, for non-native wannabe Top Guys (= me, and guys like me), we are accumulating REFERENCE EXPERIENCES at a rate that “careful guy” is not.
Knowing women is the essential skill. That comes from ref exps. As a beginner to advanced guy (but sub Top Guy), the more passive your game, the more you retard your ability to collect ref exps.
I am living proof of this ^.
Disagree.
Swagger trumps verbals. If the verbals are the best part of your game… then yeah, you blow your load on the compliment and she’s done. If that’s all you’ve got, you’re certainly not Top Guy.
But if you give a choady compliment, from the SWAG of Top Guy, with a wink.. and then follow it up with push/pull… welcome to winning.
Insightful points all over here, Nash
I see i might have communicated eschewing cold approaches completely, which is not what i intended.
I also miscommunicated Situational Alpha as ““kingships” (being a rockstart, CEO, club promoter,” but it’s not that
For me, right now, it’s about being the guy who’s seen having engaging interactions with people. So maybe it’s less Situational Alpha, and more Visibly Social Guy, and that still gets her attention.
(I see how knowledge of Game is important to make anything happen from this point on)
It’s being the guy that talks to anyone that happens close to my seat in Masters class. Then after class, chats a bit more, then casually asking if she’s going to get lunch too, cus i am, and she should come with me.
It’s being the guy on the queue who randomly starts a conversation with some guy, or an older person behind me on the queue (making sure to talk in a relaxed and light-hearted tone), then offhandedly making a comment to the girl in front of me (who of course, was within earshot to hear me be social) usually asking her for a comment or something, then use her response to do a personality read on her.
E.g
On a bank queue and a woman at the other end of the hall was screaming at a staff.
Me to Girl in Front: Why do you imagine the woman’s been screaming this long?
Girl: I dunno, maybe she has grievances
Me: Yeah, looks like she does. Do you.. ever see yourself in public screaming like that though?
Girl: Never! I don’t think anything could make me
Me: Ah, so you’re the chilled out type then?
Her: Errr, i dunno, i just don’t think i’ll be raising my voice in public like this
Me: Hmm, that interesting. So you’re calm type.
Nobody’s chill all the time though, i bet some things could make you scream. Someone maybe :)
Her: * chuckle *
Me: :)
Anyways, whats up with this queue though, we’ve been waiting a while
She: bla bla
Me: bla bla
Then i see her later around and go for the number
It’s still approaching, but i see how it’s more indirect game than the directness of Daygame stopping.
I see now how for a Top Guy, it won’t matter. It won’t matter the context, it won’t matter what he says.
And how the cold stopping of day game is the more daunting approach and i have rationalized that as being because we are starting from a place of lower value, when it’s all subject to my frame actually.
You have done a post on your proposed stack for Daygame.
Do consider doing one for Dating. Mine have been disasters so far. I’ll be thinking “Arouse her, tease, do a reflection, personalize the stories, oh, man she looks bored, i should do a verbal spike, damn she’s on her phone now. * desperately brings up an old conversation thread *, she’s still bored, man. what do i do”
It only goes differently when there’s alcohol or drugs involved, but it’s not allowed on school grounds now, and i hate alcohol anyways.
Do consider doing a post that breaks down your dating game. Maybe you’ll formally write on Octopus Game then
(posted this comment before, not sure if it went through, so i’m posting again)
I think being quite good looking in isolation is a handicap it certain ways – unless you are the rugged real masculine good looking which is more universally appealing which has more to do with being jacked muscle wise. Or famous is different . Naturally facial handsome and more on the slim side – it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. You can’t be better looking than a girl- that is her domain. So if you have naturally good looks and are high up on a purely points scale it’s not all pick and choose- you might get a few confident girls who maybe a point lower in the looks scale but the girl has to be better looking than you so you can only really get ones high up on the scale on pure looks – and there are far less of these to go around. Then you have match what she finds attractive. If you game isn’t 100% water tight you get the opportunity or opening but it fucks up in a millisecond – it’s like you are judged far harsher than someone of less looks or the girl is nervous and any tiny pause on your part she thinks you are not into her and runs away to protect her ego – better to preemptively reject someone than be rejected. Girls lower down the looks scale wholesale reject you first because you are unlikely to consider them – you are seemingly invisible to them and often they are flat out narky and a bitch to you instantly. Fat and or unattractive girls very low down the scale are openly hostile straight off the bat. A fat ugly girl will be so worked up in a retail situation that she often fuck the change and often give you too much or have three goes of getting it right.
It helps but it’s over rated. If you are in good shape and rather presentable I wouldn’t let the idea of having less handsome looks hold you back from having a crack at a hot girl.
Plus you are considered a cheat/flight risk if the girl is less confident with her own looks even if they are fine.
On top of all that you have to put up with the gay slur. I had some girl in a club tell me I was too good looking to be straight – naturally she wasn’t overly attractive it wasn’t a shit test.
Then have the odd fag try and hit on you. Or closet fags. Or fags man handle you if given the opportunity.
Or gay people are openly hostile towards you – 99% of them can tell you are totally straight. Even dykes- I have nearly got into a punch up with an aggressive butch dyke over nothing- looking at her fairly hot girl.
Yes. She is passive “beauty.” You are active “strength.”
Aka “masculine” girls.
Well done.
Very interesting.
This will sound like it is WAY OUT IN BIG EGO COUNTRY… but my wing Sundance says that I get this from girls, because of the type of girls I like. He thinks I appear too “high value” and they preemptively reject me. Sometimes.
I don’t agree. And it certainly never feels that way. But when I am after shy, “average,” introvert Asian girls… maybe some of the time, he is right.
Great comments.
I was picking on guys for being “junior league” in the post when they go on about looks (I am with you, they barely matter to me in terms of what is compelling in game)… this is the opposite of jr league analysis. Excellent.
Most of this sounds contrary to what every other facially attractive man reports.
This makes me think that there is something with your brain wiring to where you aren’t correctly perceiving reality.
I would like to think that if we switched faces for a week, you’d see what it’s truly like to be “normal”.
This still doesn’t work for me, and it’s an area where I think Yohami is myopic.
Yohami has me convinced that getting a lot of “one down” negative feedback will kill your vibe (or as Jordan Peterson says, will sap your serotonin). I think that is the only thing to worry about with daygame (and for most guys, they have few better options, so they shouldn’t worry about it much at all, not at first).
Yohami is right, IT WOULD BE BEST if you could lean back and pick girls that like you, and then lean fwd and work masculine game (so you’re not feminine). It’s a good job if you can get it..
But for a guy like Krauser (or Roy Walker… I think he might be top of his class), they are working mostly off of IOIs, and they have tremendous conv rates. That is all it would take to have “one up” positive signals from the marketplace. When I have had flashes, I was in a similar place. And then again, the Matthew Principle kicks in, and you spiral up.
And over time… you get muscle memory, and you’re naturally closer to Top Guy, even if you had to work to get there. This is the RESIDUE OF POSITIVE REFERENCE EXPERIENCES. Once they are yours… they are yours. You don’t start from the bottom anymore.
There is nothing wrong with daygame, per se. No conflict with Top Guy lifestyle. It is only a problem if you cannot get any positive feedback… then most men will spiral down, and Top Guy doesn’t work when you’re spiraling down.
The big difference to me between Yohami/Krauser, is Yohami has a “more solid frame.” I assume that is true. If girls like him more = so he has a a solid frame OR… he has a solid frame = girls like him more, hard to tell. It’s a virtuous cycle at that level… but Yohami has more of it… for whatever reason.
[…] I’m going to copy some of his last post here. I’ll publish and come back to comment on this […]
Really enjoyed this one, Nash. I’ve been drowning in the text breakdowns a bit too much recently, nice to go back to your general thoughts on applicable theory.
>>Ouch. This hurts to read because it’s true. Most men are unfuckable. Maybe 80%. That’s harsh. But it’s true. It’s redpill to see that.
It’s true of women as well.
The vast majority of women over the age of 40… the vast herd of fat chicks… they’re basically invisible to me, too, unless I’m stuck sitting next to a fat chick on a plane. The invisible chicks far outnumber the visible ones.
Almost every human has some other human or group of humans who are sexually invisible. Guys are working to become sexually visible and legible to a larger number of hot chicks.
>>Waitresses write their number in your bill. Girls give up the number easily, return your messages consistently, and rarely flake for dates. This is the Chad state.
I’ve never been here. I think extreme physical attraction and/or fame lead to this. If it’s really consistent.
A QUESTION FOR GUYS THAT WANT TO GET BETTER WITH WOMEN:
If you knew two guys that got laid a lot, that could spin plates, that had “hand” in their relationships… GUY #1 would tell you it was because he was hot (or rich, or…). And GUY #2 would teach you real insight into how women operate…
Which guy could teach you more?
To be frank… I am disappointed that we are spending any time here saying “looks matter.” I left Facebook and most forums behind because that was the best they could do. What a waste of our time.
The TOP-MOST LEVELS OF GAME absolutely have some Hot Guys (dead boring point)… but that doesn’t explain why those hot guys are better than other men that are even “hotter” than them. And it sure as fuck can’t explain why there are non-hot men in that grouping (and there are!).
If you ask yourself… WHY IS IT THAT SOME GUYS THAT ARE NOT HOT, TOTALLY FUCKING KILL IT WITH GIRLS… congratulations, you are on the path to learning about seduction.
Looks have been brought up here mostly cus a number of us here are into online dating. Looks aren’t a topic that come up with day gamers, as daygame was structured for older men who have lost their youthful looks.
But come on, we’ve gotta accept a good looking person gets a second glance from girls, although everything he does after is what matters like in bedding her. No one’s debating that.
I appreciate that POV, and I have more/more respect for online game as I see guys like Magnum (and my old wing RAUKER) do excellent work there.
But the “hey, looks matter” argument predates online dating. It is even more important for online guys, but it’s the same POV.
And if online guys choose to compete in an arena that prizes shallow signals… that’s on them. That is about where they choose to fight, not the nature of women.
Ha.
Well… I would argue that looks play a factor in “face to face” interactions as well. I mean, face to face… looks… are a thing. No one gets “catfished” IRL.
And as for daygame… perhaps you’re just trolling, but online dating became mainstream in the last 10 years. Formal “London Style” daygame predates that… but even then:
Talking to girls during the day is as old as the rain. That should be easy to understand. It is actually “normal” male/female interaction… while online is a modern aberration.
And as for older guys… it is true that I personally do much better IRL than I would online. I would be dating some beat up older girls online. In real life, you may not like the quality of the girls I date, but I certainly do… and I can date teenagers, or any age I want.
And that is interesting, right? If online is harder for me as I can’t post pics that can compete with Chad, but I can fuck like a champ in real life… why is that? Hmmm.
If it’s not my great looks, why is it I am able to game?? It’s almost like there are factors that are more important than surface looks? Or at least FACTORS I CAN CONTROL that allow me access to Chad-like situations. Hmmm. Fascinating.
Wow! For a lot of guys… it seems like focusing on game (instead of what Chad looks like) would have more power in changing their lives.
If I were a non-Chad… I could bemoan my lack of Chad-looks. Or I could wonder what all these “older men” are doing that is scoring them so much YHT. That would be a smart thing to wonder about. I have wondered about it quite a bit myself.
Last bit for you… I do think your POV about daygame is a bit ridiculous. But one of the reasons I think you think it is true… is that OLDER MEN have more experience, and can articulate things the younger guns can’t quite spell out as easily. There are plenty of young guys doing daygame, but most of what you READ about daygame is from older men. So you might have a selection bias there.
I am not saying we’re better (although, many times we are), and I am certainly not saying we’re “hotter” (which is a super weak prediction of “game” IMAO), but perhaps in many cases WE UNDERSTAND WOMEN BETTER. And sometimes it’s because we “know who we are” (which is huge driver to “game”), so we can hold still on the street with a hot girl. And perhaps there are a few well known older daygame guys because we’ve lived long enough to quit praying we “get better looking” and focus on the things that matter.
Most importantly (and we’re getting at THE HEART OF TOP GUY) we have the reference experiences to wrangle women… and that is also a function of having lived longer, worked longer, spent more time with more girls… all much, much more important than a pretty face, and ALWAYS more important for men don’t, in fact, have a pretty face.
I would never trade my experience to be a point higher. Never. That’s a fools game. And I am the hardest working man in daygame… but I am no fool.
I completely agree,
I am 22 and I have those thoughts quite often “what can I do to improve myself with woman? How can I understand them?” and so on.
Recently quit my relationship, so I am slowly coming back to game. Due to you I found out the direct way of DG.
Seriously in Poland, we were only NG (when I was interested in this topic back in 2012-2014 as a teenager) and when I found It out It was rather disappointing. I mean It wasn’t my style at all, so I was giving my best at online dating and friends of friends etc. with mere results.
Then, I found out Mystery method and his indirect way of seducing. It was working better or worse (few good encounters) and after all I found an opportunity and I was in really good relationship.
(Within 2 years) Of course, my frame got destroyed badly, I made a lot of mistakes and after all she cheated me. So I broke out with her.
So I am here at present trying to change my life in some way or another. I have plans regarding future (career path, sports, hobby’s etc.) but when It comes to fucking and rocking out with girls like I said in previous post I am in-between invisible and barely-dateable (When I am charismatic and self-confident enough, you know that state when you feel like young God. I am sure you are feeling similar too from time to time. I behave way better this way, but I didn’t grasp the exact reasons except for a few when and why It happens)
I just want to say: thanks for your content and I wrote a bit about my story to let you know, that you have young readers what thinks that YOU ROCK MAN!
I appreciate the POVs, Nash. I am having my eyes opened to a few things I’ve missed.
But it’s funny how as an avid follower and beneficiary of daygame, I have only managed to say negative things about it so far.
I mean, all three girls I had in my bed last year, I at some point used word for word, things I got from Torero’s videos.
And it is from Torero I got the idea about daygame being designed for older guys, considering it’s mantra is YHT. I think he said somewhere the average age difference between him and the girls he beds is 15years, and in many cases more than that. His advice for a guy in university was not to practice the LDM, Torero told the guy instead to join as much social groups as he could and learn escalation methods.
But I see how at the core daygame is the normal male – female social interaction that’s been done for ages, added with purposeful sexual escalation and date/texting models.
I am not a troll, I am just someone who isn’t effectively communicating his thoughts.
But back to the point on the difference between Krauser and Yohami and even Krauser and your friend The General and how they have a more solid frame than Krauser. I really think it is striking that Krauser being arguably the best LDM gamer there is, with thousands of approaches done and notches in hundreds still doesn’t have the frame of a Top Guy permanently embodied in him.
And I think it has to do with the ways they meet the women they lay.
I think the switch to Top Guy would involve becoming alpha and a leader of people in other parts of ones life apart from approaching women, and it’s why Yohami recommends that one gets a job where he’s a situational alpha and he leads people, and people take his word for authority. Say a manager, or even tour guide. He says there’s things to be learnt from that position.
As he put it “You can’t be alpha, without a pack to lead”.
Hoping I get the idea across better this time.
Mr Choad. (Good name… it’s fun to even say that.)
First off, I was extra harsh last week… as I am frustrated with the “looks matter” conversation. I was looking to shame men away from that POV. I need to write more on that topic, to help work it out of my system.
Again… I don’t mean to be overly harsh about that. The men I respect are getting me to see more in ONLINE game, for instance (not for me, but in general). Daygame is a way to MEET women. I love it. But as I am increasingly into SEDUCTION, how you meet the girl is less relevant to me.
Fuck Sneaky Tom. : ]
In all seriousness, I don’t like the guy (he has no integrity), but I know he has real lessons to teach and he has helped a lot of guys. But that line is lame.
This is a more interesting point. I just wrote about Baby Dragon, and she was 26 years younger than me. There are lots of lessons in that. One: If I was worried I was as good looking at men her age, or men in their 20s (which is a reasonable concern), or men in their 30s, or… I might not have tried to game her. But since I know that is ridiculous bullshit to worry about, I DID pick her up… and then had a great little affair with her.
If “looks matter” is a concern, and freedom from concern is enabling… we might see “look matter” as the toxic bullshit it is.
The age difference some men can overcome (and it is a sort of barrier, sometimes), is because they have more going for them than youthful, good looks. That is certainly true for me. And that also has nothing to do with daygame… but is about GAME, and about how game moves you toward what you want… if you can actually figure it out. Which is doable.
That is right. It is the most “portable” model (can be implemented anywhere). And it gives you training in social skills every single time you are out… reading faces, gauging proximity, reading crowd/group dynamics, etc.
Again… I didn’t like your point, but I was also an aggressive dick that day. Respect to you, Sir, and you’re interesting inquiries.
Maybe. One thing that is true about the men’s community at large, is that given a big enough crowd, there will always be some guy that will take a moment of honesty, use it to dis that man, in an effort to boost himself up the social hierarchy. Krauser is more honest (at a personal level) than Yohami/General. So we can say “hey, look, a weak spot!” And we fail to notice he gave that up willingly (which is a sign of fitness). And he often did it to bring some realness into this level of talk… which is rare, and I admire him for it.
I’m not saying you’re wrong… but what I am saying is also true.
This is a very interesting point. Again, I don’t know how much of this is Krauser being honest when he is not at the top of his game (vs bragging when he is).
But I think you’re right. I think he is a little less “top 1%” than the other examples… and still fucks more girls (of higher quality) than 98% of men will every experience. Not bad for “second place.”
Which AGAIN is a great thing for the rest of us to see. Yohami/General can be a bit demoralizing, as I didn’t see them get good. I only see the end product. Whereas with Krauser, we got to see the development. Krauser is not good looking (not at all), and he was “dateable” but needed work after this divorce. He killed it. And it was all manual and controlled and self made. That is deeply inspiring. He never used Environment Game to get his skills… cold approach. And he well into “Hot Guy” results. And often showing Top Guy level control and thinking.
This is why we can learn from the examples and internal frame of Naturals, but very often they make terrible coaches. And we can learn a lot of guys that were once “meh” and now kill it, as they often can tell you how they got better.
I am sure this is not true. And I particularly don’t like this, as it allows men to dismiss what they CAN DO, and instead endless wait for the perfect set up… and thus take themselves out of the game.
I get it. This is great, if you have it. But when the manager is off duty, away from his flock… his game falls apart? It might… depending on what it is based on.
If it is based on the FALSE AUTHORITY of his position, then he is nothing without it. If it is based on REAL, IN-BORN AUTHORITY… are you sure he needs the trappings of his environment?
I would argue that proper “internally referenced” authority, power, frame, oak-like masculinity can be demonstrated in your EYES. If you need much more than that, you’ll likely not anywhere near Top Guy at all.
Now THIS is an excellent point… but it’s quite different than brushing aside anything but environment game.
The qualities of the REF EXPs you get, when people are trying to win your approval/attn, is different than when you are trying to win the approval/attn. That is true.
And NOW… we are zeroing in on the main thing I believe in from Yohami’s argument. That by starting out as “Justin Beiber,” you see the world where everyone is vying for your approval. From that position, you have more serotonin (you feel better), so you have more confidence (which people like), and you get better reactions (which increases you serotonin/confidence), and you are in a virtuous spiral upward.
There is nothing wrong with being alpha. Great job if you can get it. But it’s irrelevant to the cycle. A sigma, that commands real authority in his gaze, can walk into the scene, display honest signals that are in-born, take action, and people recognize it, and start to treat him as Top Guy. He doesn’t need a flock. Irrelevant. Many men with flocks also suck with girls.
I’m not saying Sigma > Alpha, etc. I’m saying it’s about personal power. Some of which can be LEARNED (=Krauser). And when you have that, you get “better reactions” no matter where you run game.
The deal with daygame/cold approach is REJECTION. Too much rejection would challenge any man’s frame. But if you’re not getting rejected, if you can easily reframe rejection, then daygame is as good a place as any to get into the upward spiral. Daygame becomes a delivery vehicle for value. Again, this is not theoretical. Krauser has proven it. Sneaky Tom has proven it. I have proven it.
The only question is can a man utilize daygame, not “is daygame fundamentally flawed.” That is lack of nuance on Yohami’s part, and we have actually kicked his ass on that point here before. He confessed I am the first guy he has known that has made it into this stages of virtuous UPWARD SPIRAL from an otherwise “low position. We know I’m okay, but many men are better.
It can be done.
And saying that daygame is fundamentally flawed is MOSTLY about men that are afraid to approach. That is the truth as I see it. They are looking to let themselves off the hook, and use Yohami’s argument to do so. Men that let themselves off the hook… are not Top Guy.
I don’t hate those guys… but I don’t buy the sophistry that says daygame is a problem. Yes, being Justin Beiber, and picking a girl out of the crowd to fuck each night would be nice… but until then??? And you really think the title “tour guide” gets you laid? Some tour guys get laid… but it is more than that title.
Cool. Good conversation here, man. Thanks for bringing your attention here.
Ah, I get the crux of your point now.
I see how it counters the objection that daygame is intrinsically flawed and has you approaching from a place of lower value.
In that:
Daygame is but another one of the ways to meet women, along with online game and environment game. What matters then is your value, how you deliver it, and you competence then in bringing the girl from the street to your bed.
On looks though, it’s hard to see how anyone with an understanding of seduction would spend much time pushing the ”looks matter” agenda.
Looks could matter, but not really really.
On the point of visual aesthetics, a more encompassing term is what matters ultimately: ‘Appearance’, which is facial looks + dressing + body language (essentially, nonverbals that her eyes and brain would take in on first glance w/o conscious effort. But even that probably only buys one enough of her time to deliver the opener.)
But if you’re at online game, your pictures are a thousand words each, and maybe then really really looks matter.
“And you really think the title “tour guide” gets you laid? Some tour guys get laid… but it is more than that title”
Haha, Nash. Of course it’s not the title. Job titles shouldn’t matter, that’s the whole point of learning seduction.
The point we’ve tried to make there is a job like that could help one learn an important top guy skill like Leading and Expecting to be Followed.
Tour Guide in particular gives you practice with bouncing people between venues while engaging them with fun stories. Add a bit of teasing and flirting with tourists and maybe once in a while a pretty girl could slip you her number (heard it happens with attractive bartenders)
But I concede that not everyone would have access to that and would have to do without. Enter daygame.
Torero is about the only one that has the most extensive resources about daygame that any beginner could access for free online. And the “lame” points he makes are simplistic nuggets he gives to beginners so they don’t have to deal with too much nuance when starting, he later gives ‘proper points’, but packages them as “advanced game”.
And he frequently has jacked intellectual property from other people in the community without giving credit, and especially his conduct towards Krauser. That is sneaky, on evidence and there’s no excuse for it.
‘And he frequently has jacked intellectual property from other people in the community without giving credit, and especially his conduct towards Krauser.’
False. Torero gives credit a lot (he even hangs out with people like Mystery, Beckster, Janka) and his content from the daygame.com days predates the stuff Nash says he has lifted from Krauser. Have you seen Daygame Blueprint or Girlfriend Sequence?
False?
https://daysofgame.com/theory/tom-torero-thief-street-hustle-book-review/
I did a damn good job of documenting it. Do some research. I did. Way more than you’ll ever do.
I didn’t say he lifted anything from Krauser. He did, but I didn’t say that.
Read the post… or don’t. But don’t defend Sneaky Tom here. You’re wrong, and I don’t need it.
I have been been MORE than fair to that guy in terms of this skill as a daygamer and a coach. But in terms of LYING to men in the community (his famous FAKE KISS CLOSE) and STEALING the concepts of other men in the community and calling them “Torero” this/that… I have got him there.
And I think I know why he is such a cunt about all that… read the end of the post. It’s all there, man.
The latter part of that is great… escalation is a big game changer for most men. But as for the former…
The best place to PRACTICE (to learn, to get good) is COLD APPROACH. Because, when you fail… you don’t look weird in front of network of people that know you. Cold approach is low risk learning. Social circle is a bad place to be an amateur.
“You beginner guys, you need to go get in the trenches, and go on a year-ong (maybe longer) quest of cold approach, and take you lumps, and mainly go collect a bunch of reference experiences.”
— Braddock
^ practice!
One reason I am critical of Sneaky Tom is he knows this kind of stuff (I truly believe he does), but then he spits out lame advice (I think often as he is coping someone else). He can think for himself, but he often fails to do so… particularly when he out stealing other men’s ideas.
Have you met Torero Nash? I have met both Tom and Nick and I believe you are hero worshiping the latter too much. Ask around the guys who have lived or winged with Krauser. I’d read John Bodi’s ‘Death By A Thousand Sluts’ Part 1 and 2 which is a daygame memoir written by Nick’s former wing. Gives you a real picture of Nick’s pompous, thin skinned bitterness.
So what. I know he has a big ego. I also know his material incredibly well. And he has helped me endlessly. He is close to a genius in game. Great mind. Tons of experience. Very articulate. I respect him.
Bodi… is super lucky he ever hung around quality guys. He reeks of betaness. Men I respect like Magnum liked his books, but he is not the kind of man I’ll invest my time with. That is why I never talk about him or study his stuff… many men are infinitely more useful.
If you don’t like Krauser, don’t study him. And if you want to debate him… saying “Bodi doesn’t like him” doesn’t impress me.
Go after the ideas (a critique I recently gave Krauser himself), or go away. We are trying to learn game here. Talk about the concepts of game if you want to make a point. When I took Tom down, I was very specific about it… sorted several examples.
As you defend Sneaky Tom, notice how I went after the idea in my critique above. I don’t know if Tom said that or not… but I would disagree with, and so would lots of other guys with decent game.
Braddocks comment is much more solid advice.
“There is nothing wrong with being alpha. Great job if you can get it. But it’s irrelevant to the cycle. A sigma, that commands real authority in his gaze, can walk into the scene, display honest signals that are in-born, take action, and people recognize it, and start to treat him as Top Guy. He doesn’t need a flock. Irrelevant. Many men with flocks also suck with girls.”
I feel like i have done Yohami adisservice with my references on this post, man. So i’ll try to fix that.
Yohami’s Game Manifesto rests on the first principles of Hypergamy. i.e Women are attracted to high value men, who don’t need them.
So:
1) That women are attracted to men who have value, and do not need them (them i.e women)
2) Alpha is leader/top guy of the pack, the leaders of men.
But
3) The traits found in the leaders of men closely mirror the traits that women find attractive in a man.
So becoming the man who leads the pack frequently means you develop traits that women find attractive.
But the vice versa works too.
I.e becoming the man who is attractive to women means you develop traits that help you lead men.
Which is why people learn Game and along the line develop social competence and become more confident and extraverted in life, and even go on to organize bootcamps and seminars where they are essentially leading hundreds of men – like every pickup coach ever.
Now, because the norm is: one tends to be competent at Pickup and Daygame only after hundreds, and sometimes thousands of approaches. Yohami recommends that one goes through the other road, i.e becoming alpha in some other form and then learning seduction to translate that into picking up women. As it would take less time and less rejections.
The problem is, to make that point, the tendency is to knock down Daygame with it’s requirement of hundreds of approaches to learn the same lessons.
But i see how that is unnecessary.
Day/Street Game is the gladiators arena, and if one has the resources within him to survive it, learn to love it, and even thrive in it, then he essentially would have the skills to pick up women anywhere, and in whatever context. Daygame is about the most effective method one would employ in a foreign land, with language barriers. With Daygame, a man’s options are virtually limitless.
“And NOW… we are zeroing in on the main thing I believe in from Yohami’s argument. That by starting out as “Justin Beiber,” you see the world where everyone is vying for your approval. From that position, you have more serotonin (you feel better), so you have more confidence (which people like), and you get better reactions (which increases you serotonin/confidence), and you are in a virtuous spiral upward.”
Yohami’s main point is actually, “Develop attractive traits.”, it just happens that Justin Bieber is all attractive traits (x 1000)
But the main thing is to “develop attractive traits”
Which one can do in a number of ways, including formal Daygame.
But his recommendation is becoming a blend of alpha, based on your natural interests; as it just seems the easier and less arduous approach.
Excellent post, and I tip my hat to you. Your game theory is the closest I found to my own and in fact I learned a few things from you. I’m glad I found your blog.
“I have a side-theory that tyrants have the best marriages.”
Couldn’t agree more. I married quite a brat myself, but when I crossed the threshold into alpha, she began behaving quite differently. Funny though, I noticed my behaviors changed even more. On a subconscious level. It’s like a switch flipped in my head.
Now I can casually tell her to piss off and because she knows I don’t really care what she says, she happily complies. If a man applies a Deida-esque mindset to his life, he can easily become that benevolent tyrant without having to worry about betaization. His model of Kali-Shiva is perfect if you’ve ever studied Hindu theology.
For me, this is more about being a good role model to my sons and creating a legacy to leave them, than it is about “me” at this point. I’m quite a proponent of finding a true, meaningful vision greater than oneself and setting an azimuth to truly be a good captain. I suspect very few men can pull off a happy marriage in today’s age, but those who can will reap greater rewards due to the greater enherant risks.
Happy gaming, brothers!
Hey KillEgo. Good to have you here.
If you were able to turn it around mid-stream, you have something figured out indeed. In general, it seems true to me that “how it starts is how it goes.” So I wonder at how many men can recapture lost ground, even if they see the light.
Lance Mason (I’m on a roll with him, right now) says it’s all about the “first impression.” But that includes “new” first impressions along the way. If you “snap,” and she sees a new man… she could believe that. Most men can’t change the frame once it is set. She’ll smell the LARPing… and she has strong evo-bio reasons to spot a fake or a “would be.”
Yeah, man. If I go domestic again (I have lived with several women), it’ll be from that frame. It sounds harsh… but we can follow Krauser again when he says he sees women like children or animals. Harsh again, right? But imagine an untrained dog. You don’t want to be “mean,” so you don’t discipline. But if you’re not a wet-rag, you won’t like bad behavior… so you end up fighting/angry, when at the root… it was the lack of discipline upfront.
Amen.
I love every bit of this.
I am engaging a lot with Troy Francis on Twitter. He is a cool guy. I recommend him on Twitter (I haven’t read any of his books, but I own one and will read this year). He is anti-TradCon. And I like this vicious bachelor POV. He and I share a very similar lifestyle.
I really admire strong fathers/husbands. But I know too few of them. Along the way, I have a lot of love for my brothers trying to make it work, even as I watch them run their marriages with Beta/Boyfriend level strength. I admire their efforts too. But they get clobbered…
To run a Top Guy marriage… man, I wouldn’t even try if I didn’t think I could do exactly that. In some ways, that makes me a coward. Compared to a bad marriage, dating life is easy… and much more peaceful.
Great comments, man. I talk about chasing tail and dating a lot, but I get into female psych/dominant male psych much of the time… happy to see your POV.
So many good comments I forgot the original post…
I have to add this regarding daygame vs the-rest: I have witnessed other men, and have occasionally been myself, the sort of alpha guy that women walk up to and touch, that they hover in the vicinity of hoping silently that he will notice them, that woman approach constantly, so he just takes it all in. I can say that it certainly jacks your serotonin or something. It’s intoxicating for a while. BUT it is ALMOST ALWAYS situational. It rests on social proof, position in some hierarchy, dress, manners and customs, relationships with other men in the group, in addition to game fundamentals. And VERY FEW men can take it with them to another domain, especially if they fail in some way in the first and are forced to make the move. As long as the serotonin levels or whatever are with you then the glow does follow you to some degree, aided no doubt by a good suit or perfectly torn jeans. But only the top top guys can build it wherever they go, independent of some other talent – business, football, dance, body building whatever it is.
I rather suspect that a guy that looks like Nick who can pull off what he does on the street can pull off magic anywhere.
Daygame has a purity to it that strips away a lot of confounding factors.
As for me, I would have to change careers to photographer or something else to have a comparable sales funnel, so I don’t see any other choice really.
[…] Invisibles, Dateables, Hot Guys | Krauser’s SMV Totem Pole […]
Thank you for your insights Nash.
You’re best, since you have this inteligent approach to all this stuff regarding DG etc. It’s exactly what I need.
I became fan of this site (Found It due to your post regarding Thief Tom Torero, It was really informative).
Now, I know that in the best moments of my life, when I though I wasn’t bad It was “Barely-Dateable” and I was mostly invisible guy, but because I was surrounded by only other invisible guys I wasn’t that bad compared to them. Thats only It.
Having realistic view of myself is very good thing.
Thank you once again!