Tom Torero is a Thief | Street Hustle Book Review
This a review of Tom Torero’s Street Hustle daygame textbook. This post is about his book. But maybe more so, it’s an attempt for me to unpack why I don’t trust or respect that guy. Not anymore.
There are different kinds of men in the world. I’ve met a lot of guys in the community. Some of them weird or sketchy. That’s real.
Mostly, the guys I’ve met via pickup are solid guys. I credit Rivelino for emphasizing camaraderie among this community of players. I’m on board with that, 100%. We have a great opportunity to help each other, to share, and to get better.
I’ll continue with a quote by a truly great man:
“What is true belongs to me! Whatever is well said by another, is mine.”
— Seneca
I like that quote. And I have several smart and insightful quotes from Tom below… but unlike Seneca, in no way do I think Tom’s a great man. That’s where I’m going with this post.
I’ll jump into the review in a minute… but before I do, I want to acknowledge that Seneca’s quote is about how the truth can come from anywhere. And if it’s sound, we claim it as our own. This is the nature of truth… it belongs to no one, and can be accessed and harvested by anyone with their eyes open enough to see it.
And there is also a difference between “claiming the truth” for yourself, and claiming yourself as the truth. Or in Tom’s case, passing off the truth of others as your own. That’s not subtle, it’s easy to understand. I’ll make that point in more detail below.
……………….
Warming up…
It is very clear to me that in the small pond of the daygame world, Tom is a big fish. I don’t doubt his skill as a daygamer for one second. In person or via his materials, he has moments as a great coach. We all know his stuff. And the reason we know that material… is because much of it is good. We can verify the “truth” of what he is preaching with our own experience.
Here are ^ some of the products from Tom that I personally own. If they look a little well-worn, it’s because I carried them around and read every page. And I also paid good American dollars for his Stealth Seduction video product. I bought these not out of charity, but because I was interested in how Tom could point to the truth.
I continue to think Tom can point many of us in the right direction.
But over the last year or so… when I think of him, I get a little bit sick to my stomach. That’s been the basic feeling. And I’ve been genuinely curious as to why? I used to love the guy. These days, as his name comes (and it does, so often), I’m constantly choking back the urge to spit when I hear someone mention him.
Why?
It’s his character.
For me… he is (has become?) another shady guy in the community. It doesn’t mean I can’t learn from him. But more and more when I think of him, it’s like asking a drug dealer for directions… he can tell you the way… but I wouldn’t shake his hand. That’s how I feel about “Sneaky Tom.”
And after starting off as a serious fan of his contributions to daygame, I just about have it sorted out as to why I think so little of him at this point…
I bought Street Hustle over a year ago. I wanted to see what he would put into his first non-memoir book (Beginner Daygame was more like a pamphlet). But as my distaste for the guy had started to set-in… I wasn’t super excited to read anything by him.
My reasons for reading this book at all were mostly about using it as a way to keep me thinking. I wanted to review his structure as a way to check my assumptions, to inspire me, and to keep me in the culture of daygame (which I love very much). Reading the book helped me in all of those areas.
……………….
Getting into the review…
The book has very nice overall production value and is divided into three parts. Part 1., His “Introduction,” which is all context, what Krauser might call “windwank” or what is otherwise lecture-style material. Then Part 2., His “Toolkit,” which is an attempt to cover everything from the approach, to texting, to dating, to marriage. And then in Part 3., He lists and answers “The Most Common Questions.” That “question and answer” part does something smart… much better than just concepts. That’s definitely the best part of the book, by my standards.
Like Stealth Seduction, this book is NOT about daygame. It has good coverage of the topic, but Tom tries to bite off the entire mating/dating universe in this book. My wing Sundance comments that that range of subject matter should be done in a multi-volume set, not mashed into one book. I think Sundance is right.
I was disappointed in Stealth Seduction (his video product), in that is was hours of boring date conversation (like hours and hours and hours), when you might expect more daygame. This book is better than his video product (much better, actually), but has that same disconnect of relatively low amount of daygame. That is a weakness for me, and it could be a strength for some kid that has no dating or relationship experience.
I wouldn’t call anything about this book advanced. It’s a broad-spectrum primer. It is a “jack of all trades” approach, and that may be it’s strength, in some ways.
……………….
Let’s get into the positives…
Here are some of my favorite moments in the book, things that caught my eye or that I was resonating on at the time:
“Men advance; women retreat. Men go to leave; women block their exit.”
— pg45
This is a good place to start for me. I first heard this quote in one of Tom’s memoirs (I think), and I loved it. There is a lot of male/female psychology in that line… and it explains a lot about how the dance progresses. We’ll come back to this quote later…
“Between 2010 and 2012 I collected data from the hundreds of dates I went on, and I used the findings to determine my own dating model.”
— pg57
This ^ is how he introduced the “Torero Date Model.” That is a rebranding of a product he did when he was at Daygame.com (which he doesn’t mention, hmmmm). It was called the Girlfriend Sequence. I saw the video product years ago. I’ve been on a lot of dates, so this was all a little too basic and simple for me… but could be a gift if you’re new to dating. Tom does a quick text-only version of “his” model in the book.
“Game is a Trojan Horse that uses the promise of success with girls to break through to a better you.”
— pg79
This is super wise. And explains the path of so many of us in game as we start with “tactics” (outer game), and limp into doing the personal change (inner game) which is required to get good with women. We eventually become better men… or we don’t get very far at all. I’ve referenced this as “alchemy” before, same basic concept.
“It’s hard to judge where on the angel-devil spectrum a girl is at any point in time simply by looking at her… It’s important not to predict or judge, but to go and find out.”
— pg85
For me, this is a reminder not to let myself weasel because she looks bitchy or whatever. This is a big part of why I read the book… for this level of reminder. In comments like this, I feel like Tom is talking from experience, and I appreciate that POV. I still need to remember this when I’m on the street.
“GIRLS BEHAVIOR: She stops for a second then carries on.
FEEDBACK FOR HUSTLER: Paused before continuing on to Stacking.”
— pg129
This ^ is one of five examples of in a section on diagnostics. So this is about daygame (there is some specific daygame in this book). It’s in Part 2: Torero’s Hustle Toolkit > Street Hustle (which is his daygame section). That also gives you a sense of how the book is structured. The diagnostics are brief, but helpful.
“I’ve found that having more than 3 girls in your ‘harem’ at any one time in the same location is enough. If you’re sleeping with each girl once a week, it leaves almost no time or energy for going out and meeting new girls.”
— pg198
This is exactly my experience. This Spring, I had three girls in rotation for about a month or so, plus new dates with other girls… it was a little too much, and I certainly couldn’t take on more. I didn’t have much time or energy for daygame. These kind of notes from Tom can help to set long term expectations for what’s reasonable.
“Having more than one girl in your life, and multiple sources of affection, stops you feeling needy and inflating the value of girls.”
— pg198
This is a priceless lesson from game. This is still radically under-spoken and underappreciated. Most of us are trying to get *some* action, let alone multiple girls at once. And if you can get several girls spinning in your life… sounds like a chance to brag, sounds like a lot of sex (and it is)… but that really misses the point.
Lance Mason really taught me this lesson years ago. That “the first girl” quenches your “needs” at a chemical level. And then, once your basic needs of attention and affection and sex are met… each girl you meet, you can experience her for who she really is, beyond your needs. That is a powerful experience, and a very important milestone for men that make it that far in this game. Good stuff.
“A good rule of thumb for a guy is to not get married and have kids before the age of 35… Sleeping around in your youth isn’t just fun; it’s also an inoculation against the common regret that married men feel at having left the field without having really played.”
— pg201
Great advice. Love it. Agree 100%. I’m trying to extend that out to 50 years old… and for the exact same reasons he cites here.
“Pickup is just the outward manifestation of the core principles of inter-gender dynamics. It’s impossible to complete or retire from the Game, because “Game” is the definition of biological life itself; how males and females interact on Earth.”
— pg208
That’s some pretty jargon-heavy wording but I like that thought and I believe it. “There is no shelter from the SMP until the day you become totally disinterested in girls and social dynamics,” says Tom. True, true.
Okay, that’s some of what I liked about the book.
……………….
In terms of basic “weakness” of the book…
Street Hustle is too much generic “how to” and not enough examples. A lot of writing in the community is like that. I believe that Tom *has*, in fact, been on hundreds of dates, and he could have told us more from the perspective of those dates. That is one-of-a-kind detail… but instead, he gave us generalities.
Personal examples are the best things we have to offer, as men of game. Because that is how we cut through the bullshit of theory, into what is “field tested.” But more than that, your personal examples are your own. They literally belong to you. Being original is not the point of all this work (it’s about girls and growth). And if you’re not full of “original ideas” (and there is nothing “original” in seduction) you can take a pearl of wisdom and add your personal experience to it… and you’ve created something new. I respect that.
Tom does some of that in Street Hustle. There are couple of examples of situations or techniques:
On pg118 his “humble brag” example is a solid demonstration and gives you a taste for his humor (Tom can be funny). Then on pg119 he gives an explicit example about how to “close strong.” There are some moments when he goes beyond “lecture” and “theory” with relatable experience… that helps.
But even when he cites specific examples they are pretty generic. Like “say something like this” kind of advice. There is a difference between “an” example and something real from your life… there is almost nothing personal and real in this book, and that’s a weakness from my POV. Tom has plenty of that material that would make this book more uniquely his, why not use it?
To get a bit “gory” here, let’s talk about sex with a girl on her period (Tom does in the book).
Here is Tom’s treatment of the subject:
“It’s fine, we’ll put a towel on the bed.”
— pg193
For comparison, here is part of a Krauser story from Adventure Sex:
“I really dislike any talk of periods. As far as I’m concerned, girls are magical creatures who don’t piss, shit, bleed or vomit. Had this occurred a week earlier I’d have simply accepted it and arranged another date. However, I’d begun to buy into my own James Bond story. I wanted a conclusion. I asked her what day and if it was heavy, and she replied it was almost finished. ‘Have a shower,’ I said. ‘And see how you feel.'”
— Krauser, Adventure Sex
They are different types of books, to be fair… but the level of personal detail Krauser gives in his comments (the “bloody details,” so to speak) make the education more valuable to me (and more interesting). And Krauser (::spoiler alert::) fucked that girl. So the details have context. You should read that book. It’s excellent.
Tom also mentions the shower, but it’s in this dry “textbook” kind of way. There is no story. That makes Tom’s book a less effective teaching tool.
And then I could point to a few places where Tom generalizes too much:
“Once you’ve slept with a girl, the tables have turned and you’re now almost fully in control for a period of time.”
— pg196
Really? Not only does this *not* match my experience with women, but it sounds remarkable like what a 13 year old might say, if he’d overheard his older brother talking and missed all the subtly of the lesson. Sounds totally keyboard jockey to me. I wonder if Tom even believes that? I doubt he does.
I’ll be personal here and say that in my experience, when I was AFC, sex meant something (usually because it took me forever to get there, and if the girl stuck around, she was really into me). But now that I can fast-seduce… I end up with a lot of girls where the sex is not a big deal or it was a “trial basis” only. They “hit and run.” Tom’s knows this, I’m certain. I think he’s just passing out bullshit here. Out of laziness perhaps?? I don’t know. Not good.
“Create drama, not calmness.”
— pg270
So this… is some juvenile shit, IMAO.
“The more drama you cause, and the more tears she sheds, the greater her attraction and addiction to you.”
— pg301
This is garbage.
At some retarded level it might be true, and on specific instances, I bet it is very true. With low self-esteem girls, perhaps. But for most of us… is this the men we want to be? Again, Tom gives us absolutely zero examples of how this might be true in his actual experience.
And meanwhile… even if Tom believes what he wrote, I call BS on this kind of game. Lance Mason’s “Zero Drama Dating” sort of hints at different caliber of man (“Zero Drama”). And to practice what I preach here… I don’t have any drama in my relationships. I don’t. Drama is the reason I end relationships, it’s not how I keep them going. And to be clear… it’s the girls that bring the drama, not me. If you ever date Tom… I guess you’ll know what to expect.
……………….
Okay, that should give you a very good (and sober) sense for the nature of the book. I think I’ve been more than fair, up to this point.
Did I like it? Ummm, yeah, some. I wouldn’t read it again. I might refer to it (and I have already)… for it’s examples of daygame culture. And for a young friend of mine (he’s 19, very little sexual experience), I did recommend this book.
If you want a very general, very broad review of game… this is pretty good. If you want hard-hitting daygame, there is a certain “potato head” that is a much better source in terms of textbooks. And even Tom has much better material in his memoirs.
Alright… that’s enough.
……………….
Okay. I did my review. I tried to be fair and show several examples of good material, along with some honest criticisms I have of the book.
The juice for me on this post is about why I used to like Tom (and I really did), and why it is that I no longer do. Let’s get into that… and my rather intentionally insulting claim that Tom is thief — which I believe fully and will demonstrate below.
If he is a liar and thief (at some level), maybe you don’t care. That’s cool.
For me… I had been struggling to pin down why I used to like him, but now I want to “change the channel” whenever I hear his name. What changed for me?
The process of this post – and the thinking behind it – helped me sort that out.
……………….
When many of us first encountered Tom, it was while he was at Daygame.com. The backstory was he was the “nerdy Oxford gent” turned seducer. I liked that story. I believed it. I actually think that part is likely true (maybe), and was charming in it’s own way.
At some point, I think I remember Tom talking about how he had to change his wardrobe (am I making that up?). He was too “posh,” and was getting put in the “nice guy”/provider box too often. This is all casual recollection here on my part, so don’t quote me on this bit. But as I write this post, I think that is clue as to what happened to him.
Why does he make me sick when I think of him now? What is it that ruined him for me as a hero??
It wasn’t only that I did a very painful review of Tom’s Stealth Seduction video product. That product (which is the companion to this textbook) was gross to watch. Tom was gross. And I admitted over and over that I sound like he does on those dates in many ways. Maybe we’re all gross to watch as we try to ply girls out of their panties. I’m sure I am, sometimes. But it’s not just that…
There is something about his vibe…
I can’t shake it… that feeling like there is something disease-ridden about him… this sense of “I don’t trust that guy” has bubbled up around thoughts of him for the last year or so. What is that about?
I have been genuinely surprised and curious to change my mind about the guy.
Meanwhile… he is such a marketing whore that you can’t get away from him. If you’re into daygame (and I am), I would make the claim that no one in our space markets himself like he does. It’s not just that everyone I know in the scene talks about his material and quotes him… even I do it. I cite him all the time.
So as the days go by, and I get glimpses of him… I feel like I’m seeing behind the curtain a bit. Stealth Seduction was part of that. But this book made it clear…
It’s not just that Tom is a thief… but that is a clue.
Let’s break that down. We’ll start with the book:
It’s little things, like this:
“Tell her she has something on her face, and then pretend to remove it.”
— pg186
So that is part of how Tom teaches you “physical escalation.” That’s shit game, but that’s not my point.
I’ve been studying game for years. I owe so much to the smart, active guys before me. If you read this blog, you know I am constantly quoting other guys. So in that example above, I believe that is ripped off from Mystery, straight out of The Game, by Neil Strauss. That irks me a bit. Partly because it’s shit game and terrible, weak advice on how to get good with women. But mostly as that he is passing that off that “trick” as his own. Lame.
To be honest that’s a weak example, here’s another one from his book:
“If you see a girl three times a week, she’s your girlfriend. It doesn’t matter what you say to her or what she agrees to – she’s your girlfriend.”
— pg199
This is a really excellent point, and one that meant a LOT to me when I first heard it… but I first heard it in Zero Drama Dating by Lance Mason of Pickup101. This was almost 10 years ago. And that’s not a generic point about girlfriends.
Here is what Lance said at the time:
“The rule is: If you’re seeing someone, three times a week, you’re in love. Get over it.”
— Lance Mason, “No Drama Dating” (DVD2)
So Tom says “girlfriend” and Lance say “in love.” Not a perfect match… but no way I believe Tom just happened to be so close to Lance on that thought. It’s very specific, not a general pickup truism, and something I’ve never heard anywhere else but these two instances. It’s possible that Tom and Lance both took it from the same source (maybe something like “The Red Queen??”). It’s “borrowed” by Tom, I feel certain. And Lance said it better anyway.
As I read Street Hustle I kept having moments like this… these “borrowings.” They pissed me off, watching him pass this content off as his own insights. He looks like an ass in those moments.
And I hate to see a former hero look greedy.
Greed. That could be a big part of the story. His genuine notoriety isn’t enough for him. Despite his very real fame, he’s running around stealing from his brothers and claiming it as his own… when he doesn’t need any of that. And he is a long way off from camaraderie at that point.
This is a view into what I object to… he has no brothers. Everyone is a “mark” to him. Someone to rip off.
When I was writing about the Chinese Fashion Girl I picked up in NYC, I said I picked her up in TopShop (and I did). As I wrote that post, I was going to feature a comment or two about TopShop from the LDM guys. I never used a quote, but I did some research at the time:
Here is a guy named James Tusk talking about gaming in TopShop:
JAMES TUSK: You’re essentially in a brightly lit room, with a nightclub environment, because there’s loud music playing, and only girls
JAMES TUSK: Imagine if there’s a nightclub on planet earth like this, and you’re the only guy around, and absolutely loving it
— Aug02, 2017
Okay, cool, whatever.
But as I was looking for another quote, I found this:
TOM TORERO: Topshop’s like a nightclub just without alcohol or men – it’s three floors of girls all crammed into a small area, plus feel-good music pumping and zero competition.
— Aug03, 2017
So, I’m not sure who James Tusk is, but I have a pretty good idea that Tom knows who he is… as Tom wrote almost word for word what James said, exactly one day after James said it.
No, I don’t buy that as a coincidence. It’s blatant, nearly word for word. What are the chances Tom would reference TopShop as a nightclub, exactly one day after James said it… when they are essentially competitors, in the same market as daygame coaches?
What does that mean to me? I am imaging Tom is out scanning other guys stuff, intentionally looking for things he can steal. Like he wakes up… goes to the internet… intending to steal. That’s what he did on Aug03 this year.
Maybe some of these instances are, in fact, coincidences. But all of them? No way. It seems clear to me… Tom is a poacher.
He is so desperate (apparently) for content (maybe more than that) that he’s out actively pulling “game” out of other hunter’s traps. That’s gross. This is a good example of why Tom makes me sick as I get to know more about his character. I think this is exactly what Tom “smells” like. It’s foul.
So much for the “Oxford gentleman.” He’s plagiarizing. If he went to Oxford (and maybe he did not??), I’m sure he knows what it means to poach another man’s intellectual property. It’s small. And no matter how smart you actually are, it would get you kicked out of school.
And James is a relative unknown vs Tom’s reputation, so maybe Tom figured he could sneak off with that idea (which isn’t even worth stealing, but is clearly stolen, blatantly so).
How about this one, also from his book:
As part of the “10 Step Torero Physical Escalation Ladder” section (notice that he brands it “Torero,” he very much wants credit for “his ideas”), he talks about “Three Criteria”, and at that point, I already knew he was about to claim something that wasn’t his to claim:
“TOM TORERO: Tell her there are three things you love in a girl. The first is good smelling hair…”
“Tell her the second thing you like is a girl who doesn’t wear too much makeup. Say that the test for this is that if she kissed your hand and there’s a lipstick mark…
Finally, tell her you like a girl with a good taste in shoes…
“Explain that good taste in shoes means a good taste in underwear.”
— pg185 (the book came out in 2016)
Oh really? That’s a Torero technique, huh? Sounds pretty familiar to me:
BECKSTER: “The first one is I don’t like girls that wear too much makeup. There’s a little test we do, put a kiss here and it leaves a lipstick mark…
“I love girls with lush smelling hair…
“I have a third criteria, I really like girls that have good taste in shoes… do you know why?
“Because good taste in shoes means good taste in underwear.”
— From a London Saturday Sarge talk, 2012
So, for those of you that aren’t old school about all this, this routine may have come from someone else, but it was made popular by Beckster. His version is much better, and is used in the context of qualification, not escalation… but from there, Tom copies Beckster nearly word for word. Tom “cleverly” swaps point #1 and point #2, but otherwise… word for fucking word. This so shameless on his part. Ripping a super classic routine and calling it his… sad.
Maybe Tom doesn’t know who Beckster is, right?
Except anyone that has studied Tom (and I have) knows he studied Beckster. Like side by side in clubs together. This is all in Tom’s book Daygame.
There it is… straight from Tom’s book. It’s got the word “Beckster” in the upper left corner, a pic of him, and the full routine.
Tom knows exactly where that routine came from, of course he does. Shameless. So, after learning from Beckster (winging him, I presume, at some level), Tom rips off his material and claims it as part of his “escalation ladder.” That is a classic routine that has absolutely nothing to do with Tom Torero.
For comparison, Beckster gives credit to other PUA types over and over in that talk… including a note to Ross Jeffries as he demo’s this routine. Not everyone in the business is a thief.
You warmed up yet? Let’s do one more… and this is the one that made me know I wanted to write this post:
“It’s a magic line that you can use on text or in person on a date, it’s a dirty trick and you just use the phrase ‘How normal are you?’ I use this a lot on text.”
— Tom Torero, Nov07, 2017
It’s a magic line alright. And Tom may use it on texts, and he is selling it hard as one of *his* dirty tricks, but he isn’t the slightest bit interested in pointing out where he got that line:
“The quickest seductions occur when the woman is thrown back in the defensive crouch. In fact, the line “So how normal are you?” could legitimately serve as an effective, all-purpose opener.”
— Heartiste/Roissy, May20, 2016
Roissy doesn’t give exact credit to the man that sourced that line (presumably to preserve the source’s anonymity), but he *does* say it was sent to him by a reader. Roissy is happy to deal out credit where it is due… he’s not such an ass he has to steal other men’s thoughts. Roissy is a great example of a pillar of game that consistently cites where his premises come from, and then… expands on them. Often, with specific and personal examples.
Let’s make no mistake here, Tom is very into getting credit for this stuff.
When he is busy stealing from Beckster in his “Escalate Ladder” stuff above, he makes it clear it’s the “Tom Torero Escalation Ladder.” In his dirty tricks video, he wants you to know that the “Miami plastic surgery” bit is “his routine.” He uses the word “patented” as well. Right after he steals that Roissy line, he talks about his “copyrighted” text opener.
So Tom is very aware that men have the right to recognition for their material… he wants that kind of credit for himself, that is obviously clear… but he will poach and steal from others.
Okay… so there is a fuck-ton of evidence.
The super weird part of all this is… Tom was already infamous for hiring an actress for a fake infield kiss-close (presumably to catch up to Yad… but Yad’s kiss was real).
Who cares about infields? Only us. Who is he lying to? He is lying to us:
“The latest scandal-of-the-week is that famous daygame instructor Tom Torero was caught out having hired an actress to appear in a “kiss close” video recorded outside Selfridges on Oxford Street in summer 2012.”
— Krauser, talking about Tom in Dec2014
The dude was already busted for lying to the daygame community. Why is he still doing shady shit? What the fuck, Tom? Seriously. It was a noisy big deal back in 2014, and he’s still continuing his trend of bullshit. Maybe not faking infields (although???), but appropriating other men’s work and passing it off as his own.
“What’s interesting to me is that over the years Tom has taught hundreds of students, and hundreds more have used the day game model he created with me (and others). Literally hundreds of people have seen Tom live in-set with their own eyes in unfakeable interactions. Hundreds have been live in-set themselves implementing advice they got from Tom and then seeing the effect it has on the girls. These people have enough direct evidence of their own eyes that (i) Tom’s daygame skills are for real and (ii) the London Daygame Model works, that the fact Tom got caught red-handed faking one infield doesn’t really matter. Yes, it was a bad thing to do. But no, it doesn’t shake their confidence in the model or Tom’s abilities as a coach.”
— Krauser
Krauser is correct here. It doesn’t mean anything about the LDM. Daygame is real. And I believe Tom is a very real and successful daygamer (I did a whole post about Tom’s NYC infields, which I assume aren’t all lies and fakery).
So why is Tom such a poacher?
Could there be anyone else with more legitimate content? More tales to tell about girls and game? Maybe, but not many. Tom should have more real experiences to share than almost any other daygamer. And yet… he does this ghetto shit.
“Tom is an elite-level daygamer, possibly more skilled than I am. You’re well within your rights to cut him off your ‘guy to listen to’ list after this video expose but if you do so you’ll be missing out.”
— Krauser
Even after what I know of Tom, I still agree with what Kruaser is saying here – although I sincerely doubt Krauser would say any of that about Tom today.
This is the point I was trying to make with that Seneca quote in the intro to this piece.
But if Tom is a recognized “king” in daygame… why would he run around and steal the towels from the hotels he stays at? Is that king-like behavior? No. It is not.
I’ll take a guess as to what is going on as Tom steals from other community guys over and over and over:
Tom is broken. Maybe he always was, but in the early days of his path of self-improvement it wasn’t obvious. But he’s broken now.
Maybe what is fucked up about that guy is crystallizing as he gains fame. This is an indication of his potential for a Britney Spears level melt-down. As he rises to the top, we see how shallow his roots are.
Perhaps he’s arrested. He’s *is* the “nerdy Oxford” type. He likely got picked on by other guys, including slimy guys, back in grade school. But he was never honorable. As his daygame career took off, he didn’t want to outgrow those slimy guys that picked on him when he was young… he wanted to *be* them. And now that he’s “made it,” he is the slimy guy. He’s arrived. These petty thefts from the pickup community aren’t out of character for him… they are his character.
This ^, of course, is all amateur psychology and speculation. I’m just guessing about the dude’s pathology.
But… we know the “stealth” and “hustle” and “sneaky Tom” shit has been beat to death by him. He is retarded about that theme.
” I’ve always been a huge fan of the heist genre”
— Tom
Yeah, yeah… we get it Tom. You like “stealing” references. No shit.
But Tom can’t tell the difference between properly robbing a bank, and stealing a bartender’s tips off the bar. We know he likes Ocean’s Eleven, but he’s not doing a master con on Vegas… he’s breaking into parked cars to steal the coins out of the center console. What a fool. That’s what I’m pointing to about Tom. I think that’s nearly an apt comparison to the level of Tom’s lowness.
“It’s the hustle rather than the sex that I’ve been addicted to”
— Pg274
At last… Tom tells the truth. Maybe for the first time.
“I think it’s forgotten that successful pickup artists automatically have big egos, delusions of self grandeur, dark triad traits, are natural grifters, hustlers etc. To be morally outraged that a cad is a floozy is like being shocked that a magician is good with sleight of hand. C’mon chaps, let’s stop the he-said-she-said tittle tattle as TheDonald said which is really just virtue signaling.”
— Victor, from Krauser’s blog on an unrelated topic
Victor likes the “hustler” reference too. And so does my wing Sundance (who is a stand-up guy). I consider myself a hustler, as well… “hustle” as in work ethic. And hustle as in me vs the bluepill me… I want to “cheat” that version of myself out a of life of mediocrity. I want to cheat Disney out of another picket fence illusion. That’s my level of hustle.
And let me spell this out… I have no morality issues with game, obviously. Unlike Tom, I don’t have any interest in overplaying the “sneaky” part of this, I am proud of what we do as men of game (that’s part of my inner game).
Guys that know me know that I will announce what I am up to, there is no false morality or shame about this for me. If we “steal another man’s lunch money” (as Krauser has said), it’s a fair fight, actually, of our SMV vs that other guy. We “steal” in comparison to the expectations of romantic comedies. We steal a girl’s innocence. And we don’t actually steal. We don’t need to… the pussy comes along… willingly. That’s the point. Charm. Willing “victims.” This is seduction, not theft. With potential “repeat customers.” No actual theft is involved.
And if Tom wanted to talk about stealing from the girl (and he does this, sort of, in his “first hustle” which is in the book) I would be cool with that… somewhat. It’s still a symptom of a small, middle school mentality. But if that’s what he meant, ahh, whatever. Grow up… but fine. But that’s not what he’s doing.
He is straight up with the girls (for the most part). He just steals from other guys in game.
He steals from us. He steals, it seems, exclusively from his brothers.
And then tries to fence his stolen goods back to us as his own creation. He steals – deliberately – from men that taught him. And then wants the next generation to pay him for “his wisdom.”
Okay. Well this is part of his story too.
“Play or get played. Hustle or be hustled. That’s the name of the game.”
— pg209
He is talking about stealing from Roissy and from Beckster… and then rolling around with that knowledge… like a petty car thief trying to convince his parents the stolen Buick out front is from “his hard work.”
The only “marks” here are us… that we believe this is his work. That’s insulting. He thinks he is gaming us (I bet that is part of the thrill). And he has, in many ways. Probably much more than I am able to spot and document here.
What an asshole.
If Tom had any history of saying, “I don’t know where I got this, but you should check it out,” I would be more than cool with the examples above. Not everybody is a goddamn game historian. But we have basically no evidence of that. I know he credits Mystery here and there (in this book, and in his Daygame 3.0 video). He credits Cialdini (the guy that wrote Influence). But there is a trend of him as a thief and it’s intentional, and he assumes we won’t notice or care.
I care. In part, just as I can now finally articulate why I don’t like or trust that guy.
This “smelling him out” is part of being calibrated and being good at reading people. If you’re socially calibrated, you should get a “funny feeling” about someone when they’re up to something shady and incongruent. This is our craft. We are supposed to be good at reading social cues (like desperation and incongruence). I increasingly read him as such.
It’s not that he isn’t a good daygamer. He is. It’s that his daygame skill hides some other facet of his psychology… something ugly. I don’t have it all worked out, but I am pointing to something real.
There are lots of guys in this community I show my back to, and at this point… Tom is one of them now. I’d roll my eyes if I saw him in person. If he walked into a room, I’d walk out.
But more over… I bet this stealing is just one of many examples where that guy is broken. This is the part that I can see, but I bet it runs deep.
I’ll close out with this:
“Catch Me If You Can: Great for technique and the hustler’s way of bending perception. Bad for the unresolved inner game and eventual SMV change.”
— pg277
That part of his book was pure foreshadowing for me. This is the heart of it…
Tom has some inner game issues (who knows what from, I don’t care)… and they leak out in his compulsive theft. He’s the Wynona Ryder of pickup (what a joke)… doing stupid shit for no reason, just like she did… stealing stuff from Saks that she could afford to buy. She could afford to be a person with honor. But she is not. And neither is Tom. He is as low as a kleptomaniac swiping lip gloss from a drugstore.
Maybe he wants to get caught. That’s another guess I’d make. Maybe he’ll thank me for giving him that sense of completion – he is finally truly “seen.” Maybe Mom and Dad never paid “Sneaky Tommy” enough attention… and this is him, acting out… in an obviously childish way.
Oh well. I finished his book. I wrote about it. I even probably learned a bit.
And I’ll continue to learn from him… despite his lack of character. He is persona non grata to me. Another lowlife. But as he cranks out more content than Buzzfeed… all in an area that I love and care about very much… I won’t be able to avoid him.
So I will incorporate anything from him that has the ring of truth to it… and just assume anything that comes via him is stolen. I’ll take the truth, and throw the shell of him away. That’s fair at this point.
“Whatever is true is my property.”
— Seneca
Seneca was an honorable man. I will study anyone. And the “truth belongs to me.” Even if it touches Tom… if it’s real, it’s real.
I feel a little better with this out of my system. I have a clear sense of why I want to spit when I think of him. If I can find the truth some other place, I will. I’ll certainly never pay for anything of Tom’s again. I’m divesting from that guy… what a tool.
One last thing… I started out my review with a quote from Tom I have always loved, that line about “men advance, women retreat” and all that. Well…
“Woman begins by resisting a man’s advances and ends by blocking his retreat.”
— Oscar Wilde
Looks like Tom changed the order of the words… and otherwise, stole that from Oscar Wilde. Jesus Christ. Is any of Tom’s material his? What a douchebag.
Here’s to honor amongst thieves. Tom… I’m quite sure you wouldn’t know what I mean.
Viva daygame.
Bingo.
Excellent post. I found DG a few months back and the first time I saw Tom I had exactly the same thought as here:
“Tom is broken. Maybe he always was, but in the early days of his path of self-improvement it wasn’t obvious. But he’s broken now.”
I haven’t said anything about it since I was only basing it off my impression from a few YT videos. Thought that since Krauser spoke highly of him in the past perhaps there was a difference between the YT persona and the real-world persona.
Needless to say after that realization I tuned out of his material entirely.
This post is actually very important.
I don’t know any people who are good with women in real life. I looked up to Tom Torero and expected him to represent the best there is.
So I did notice that “shady” part of him, but the messed up thing is I thought: “Maybe that’s what is needed to get great with women at a high level!”
In a way, Tom’s “brokenness” is making copies of him, people who assume that being slimy is good for getting girls, and will become more of that (It doesn’t help that he glorifies pimps and dark triad traits).
This post was like a wake up call, that slimy and shady is him being broken, it is NOT a characteristic of a great seducer.
It reminds me that in Zen, that talk about that: Some people see an enlightened master who drinks a lot and start drinking assuming that’s what enlightened people do, or an kung fu master who is a repugnant asshole and assume that being rude and an asshole is part of mastering kung fu. Well, the same with PUA, I assumed that being slimy and shady is part of getting good with women, and I am so happy to realize it is not because I did not want to be that way and assumed I am reducing my results by not going to the dark side!
I think tom was always broken. Look at the video where he shows his childhood and college life. Game didn’t “fix” him, it just put a new veneer onto already-rotting wood.
Any man needing to learn Game as an adult is ‘broken’ by definition. That’s why it’s even more important to weed out the broken instructors / gurus. No need to double down on the wrong things.
Not true at all. Where do regular boys learn how to attract girls without learning game? Surely not from their fathers, not anymore, and not from any role models who exist in this day and age.
I agree with M.
I personally grew up without a father present. I had no role model of masculinity or game.
This doesn’t mean I am broken by Yohami’s definition. I just did not get the opportunity to learn game by observing, so I took it upon myself to learn intellectually and through experimenting.
Exactly
I think I’m correct about, Tom. And I would have his back, and support him, except he’s not upfront about where he is at. It’s a veneer – that’s what it feels like.
And that fake veneer is only for us. I bet he’s reasonable real w/ the girls (even having suffered thru his video product, I still think that). Girls get a semi-real version of him, normies don’t know him or care… the lies are only for us in the community. His fake kiss close… and everything else.
And he is building his “mask” out of the work of other men in this community (stealing their stuff), and claiming it’s his real face… that’s two strikes, right there.
Honestly… I feel much better about the whole thing, having written this. I’m done with him. He’s just “some guy” to me now.
writing was your catharsis
>> Any man needing to learn Game as an adult is ‘broken’ by definition. That’s why it’s even more important to weed out the broken instructors / gurus. No need to double down on the wrong things.
— Yohami
I think Yohami is caught in semantics here (maybe I’m wrong). A lot of guys use “game” or “pickup” to describe anything negative about “seduction,” but would quickly call “becoming more Top Guy” a good thing.
For me, “pickup” and “game” are conduits for growth… no red flags for waiting to grow. It’s a set of tools. Wanting tools is healthy.
>> Where do regular boys learn how to attract girls without learning game? Surely not from their fathers, not anymore, and not from any role models who exist in this day and age.
— M@M
Totally agree with this. ^
>> I personally grew up without a father present. I had no role model of masculinity or game.
— cHulo
In my case, my Dad is too emotional, but he’s very masculine. But when it came to girls… he actively hid his game from me. He dissed “game like behavior”, even though he was good when he met my mom (she ended up telling me the story of how he picked her up).
The only thing my Dad ever taught me was “be nice to girls.” Fucking sucked. I didn’t realize it then… but he was hiding my legacy from me.
So yeah… I had men in my life actively hiding game from me, and the larger culture trying to teach me that men suck… it was the book The Game that woke me up… and I was 35.
I would have loved to have done it earlier… just didn’t know it was possible. the Game was my redpill awakening.
And for men that find game… we’re not “whole” when we start… but if you keep going on this path, it makes you “less broken” everyday you aim toward growth and being a better man.
Nothing in my life did more to “clean me up” than everything I found on this path.
I hate the term PUA or anything to do with “pick up”. Brings to mind the sleazy mystery method actors like Vince Kelvin et cetera.
I don’t even know what to call what I do. Womanizing? Daygame? Eurojaunting? Mostly in conversations I use the latter, but really all it is is being a high value man and using game, in krauser’s words, as a value-delivery mechanism.
*shrugs*
“Any man needing to learn Game as an adult is ‘broken’ by definition.”
If you’re an adult man and you don’t know how to deal with women then you’re not a functional man, therefore you’re a non-performing tool, therefore you’re a broken tool.
If you need to learn game as an adult – then what have you been doing so far?
Absent father, femcentric society, lack of models – all these are possible causes that prevented you from developing as a man.
Learning Game is learning to speak like a man, learning to behave as a man, think as a man, perform as a man. And hopefully you use it to actually become a man.
A man without Game is not a man. May be just a person, or a guy, or a tool. A broken one.
So there.
So Im not ditching on game – the emphasis is on MAN and ADULT. This is something we should have learned from infancy. Learning it as an adult means deprogramming and deconstructing, destroying habits, making new ones, switching frames, changing your whole self. Because you were lost and useless.
So yeah I stand by that.
100%
Via Game… we get a deeper look into psychology. Ours. The girls (of course). But also other men.
If you’re not learning psych from Game, I think that is weird. And if you are, you’ll start to “feel” the “vibe” coming off a guy…
And the more I got past Tom’s “presentation,” the more I could feel he had big issues. Watching his seduction video product made me feel sick… it allows you to be way too intimate with him. That was when I started to see the rest.
And if I could feel it… the girls could too. No way he was that good at Game (“intermediate” at best). He was also “leaking” his issues. The girls would feel that too. Of course.
Good instructor for beginners… big problems beyond that.
Funny, I always had that exact word in mind whenever I’ve had the misfortune of seeing or hearing him: ‘slimy’.
One thing that always jumps out is how he talks about sex. He speaks about it in a very juvenile way. In other cases I’d think it’s because the person is speaking deliberately to their target market but with him I’ve always had the sense that deep down he has the following beliefs and frames.
1. He’s not worthy of women
2. Women don’t really like sex
3. He has to trick women into having sex with him
He tries really hard to cover it up with coarse language but it’s like a 16 year old that uses rude language with his female classmates but has not experience or ability to follow through.
I’m not saying he doesn’t or can’t get results. It just comes across like he’s out for revenge for all the times he was rejected as a teenager. I think he uses the language to psyche himself up,
Hmm, do you have an example? I’ve watched a bit of his stuff and haven’t encountered this.
Introvert… I think you and I see him the same way.
>> He’s not worthy of women
I think this is his Catch Me If You Can mental frame. It’s all an act. He is very good at it… but he’s not at home.
>> He has to trick women into having sex with him
I don’t want to pick on the guy in this area… a lot of us struggle with being entitled to sex. But that “trick” part might be beyond uncertainty. The frame he chooses says something about his base.
>> He tries really hard to cover it up with coarse language but it’s like a 16 year old that uses rude language with his female classmates but has not experience or ability to follow through.
This is dead on. In Stealth Seduction he calls each girl a “bitch” in every set, and it always feels half-cocked. It feels like “a technique” each time he does it, so it was hard to miss. And his lack of comfort feels like he thinks his mom might walk into the set and overhear him, send him to his room, no cookies.
I think he is much more at home w/ the Oxford “routine.” More naturally “k.” Which is fine. So am I. But it’s what if feels like to watch the path he’s chosen, post-Oxford. His version of “the bad boy” is sticky… make me want to cross the street.
I think his tattoos are also part of this “faux-edge.”
………………..
But… I want to go back to being about support. I could feel for a guy that does any of the above. Imperfect gamers are welcome in my world, I am certainly imperfect (not as good as Tom, when it comes to game).
What I don’t like his is stealing shit. That’s not about game or improvement. That’s only about lack of character… and it telegraphs some inner issues.
That is my point.
I understand that you want to stay positive, this is the first time I’ve ever written anything about him and the only reason I’m doing so in what seems to be a negative way is because I want people to be aware of who they are learning from. I’m sure he has lots of things to teach. But new guys don’t have the experience to recognise the underlying frames of certain gurus. I just want to warn them. Be smart, be critical.
I’ve been deep in the game scene since very early on, years before Neil Strauss wrote his book. I was there on the old newsgroup alt.seduction.fast set up by Ross Jeffries. I remember the old school guys like MrNYCSex4U and TokyoPUA, Gunwitch, Formhandle, Swinggcat, Toecutter etc. etc. I’ve met and hung out with Tyler Durden, Papa, Hoobie, Ozzy, Mystery, AFCAdamLyons, James (the Natural), Juggler, BadBoy, Jeffy, Sasha, Yad, Yosha etc. etc. I’ve seen the whole community and industry develop years so I can tell you pretty much the whole history of how things developed.
I don’t like to see people not giving props to the true originators but more importantly I want new guys to learn how to get better social skills from people that have strong empowering and positive belief systems.
>> But new guys don’t have the experience to recognise the underlying frames of certain gurus. I just want to warn them. Be smart, be critical.
— Introvert
With you 100%.
Let’s not stand on ceremony here Nash…how do you really feel about the guy?
Wow. Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy to prove this – you’re kind of the Bob Woodward of Daygame… Well done! You must really love the craft.
Overall, always sad to see people with merits chip away at their image (damage themselves).
“Great advice. Love it. Agree 100%. I’m trying to extend that out to 50 years old… and for the exact same reasons he cites here.”
I would like to push that further to 55 at least (for a given reason;)
Keep going!
I read the book for my education… I study a lot.
And I knew he stole that stuff, because I’d already been exposed to the original sources. The Roissy line was mentioned to me by Sundance as I had already started this piece, and I immediately called that out at Roissy’s IP. And then YoungGuns helped me link to where Tom mentioned it. I already knew the Roissy citations very well.
Same with all the other references.
It was a bit of work to document it, but I didn’t wake up one day trying to make Tom looks like a dipshit… he does that all on his own.
It was as I slugged thru his book, seeing reference after reference… it was a burner.
Since I was going to do the review anyway… I thought I’d put this spin on it.
And I do feel more “settled” having chewed my way through this.
My wings bring him up every day… so I have a lot of opportunity to consider why he is more and more repulsive to me… this part of him seems enough for me to explain that feeling… and put it to bed.
I’m done with that guy (as much as I can be).
Damn.
I suppose I would see Tom’s side of the story as well. Sure, he borrows material, but there are no original ideas. He is a great marketer, and he packages well-known ideas into a format easily digestible by beginner-intermediate guys.
Overall, I think he is a boon to the community.
We all borrow ideas. Beckster borrows from Ross Jeffries. Roissy borrows/samples from everyone. David Deangelo made a career out of being a “game curator.” All of that is honorable and a great service to the rest of us.
I don’t think there is a single “original” idea in the last 50,000 years… but… most men will either say they picked this up somewhere, OR, will give credit.
“There is a line I heard somewhere that I love… it goes like this: “Who lies more? Men or women? Because…”
^ That is legit.
Tom is taking credit. Stealing Roissy’s line… crazy blatant. The James Husk part… that is not borrowing. That is raiding another guy’s content.
>> Overall, I think he is a boon to the community.
Yeah… I think you’re right. I think he’s a loser… but he has been good for daygame. I know I have learned from him.
Yes, it’s not that you can’t learn from him, or that he may be great at what he does. But when you’ve been in this for a while you can pick up very subtle clues as to what someone’s frames and belief systems are like. It’s a symptom of an underlying issue.
Pancakemouse = “I don’t care if he’s a thief, so long as I get part of the loot”
Does he claim the ideas are his? That’s the operative question. I haven’t seen him say things like “this is a Torero technique”, etc.
I haven’t bought any of his products, I’m just going off of what I’ve seen on his blog and YouTube channel.
This is the issue, Pancake.
I’ll argue he is guilty of intentional omission, in many cases. That seems consistent with his personality, to me, at this point.
But… in other cases, he is clearly claiming things as his own:
The Roissy example ABOVE is one look at Tom doing this. Tom claimed that technique as part of the “Torero Dirty Tricks” video (I linked to it). He doesn’t explicitly say he invented those “tricks,” but notice he IS branding them Torero. Getting credit for them, is specifically important him… “how normal are you?” is sold as a Torero thing. And Tom knows where he got it. We all do. Fucking lame. Of course it’s intentional.
The Beckster bit… is in the “Torero Escalation Ladder.” Maybe Tom would take a bullshit “legal” POV and claim that he only intended to brand the “ladder”, not the steps IN the ladder… and that might work in court… but I would expect reasonable men to reject that for the BS it is.
And the James Husk thing… the timing of it, unbelievable to me. Tom presumably listened to James’ video, and then cranked out a post that copies the idea AND the language… one day after he heard it. It’s in the context of a larger piece, but so what. Tom did this a day after James… he was clearly inspired… so he stole it. Tom takes what he wants and runs off… to sell it back to guys that don’t know any better.
Someone on my Twitter feed said that this is “my opinion.” This is not my opinion. My opinion is that Tom is douchebag. The issues of him stealing material and claiming it as his own… those are facts.
Yikes. I trust you on this. I know you have done your research. I won’t be buying anything from Torero (not that I would have anyway).
my personal experience with tom torero: in 2013, i did a bootcamp with tom, and he was an amazing teacher. he was fun, positive, patient, encouraging. learning from him was a tremendous boost to my self confidence. he was a HUGE motivation for me, he was a HUGE reason i was able to do my first 1,000 approaches, and that is something that has changed my life, so i will always be grateful to tom.
during that bootcamp, i mentioned my blog, and he would comment occasionally. a few years ago, i was struggling with a relationship, and i wrote about it on my blog. he read it and was concerned, so he called me up and we talked for over an hour about life, women, and relationships.
my personal experience with tom has been 1000% positive.
Most of what I’ve seen from Tom is directly anti-game.
Or a million half cooked tricks with no foundation and no grasp on the basics.
Its the pua approach to game, where you dont have value but gimmicks.
Krauser could say a word or two about „Torero” and „stealing”…
https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-54566.html
I think Tom definitely pushes the envelope between truth and bluster. I’d say maybe 50% of his stuff is legit. It’s not that his advice is bad, just that it’s scattered because he hasn’t done everything he says he’s done, to an extent more than others I’ve read. On that note, how does anyone actually think that good looking loser site is legit? Those infield vids are fake as hell, unless I’m missing something. But again, decent advice on that site, even though it’s scattered too for the same reasons.
When I first started and was feeling really depressed, Tom made a video about how daygame turned his life around and improved himself personally, which I appreciated. Did that really happen? Who knows. But he knew how to press the buttons and say the right things to his market, that’s for sure. I didn’t buy anything from Tom, because I didn’t trust him even though his advice was good. I didn’t want to waste time trying to pick out the real from the fake, when I felt more trusted sources didn’t need such a scrupulous eye. This shit is hard enough without having to be a detective.
I believe Good Looking Loser to be legit.
Which infields do you think are fake?
Krauser had a short lived blog-post that accused TT of plagiarizm without reference. I assume Tom called and made up since Krauser deleted it less that two days later.
TL;DR of this post is “TT is a Plagiarist.”
People use Android OS on their phones because it works, everyone knows that it was copied from Apple’s iOS and they don’t much care.
That analogy probably applies to a good chunk of the guys who buy this kind of material, for better or worse.
>>> “Game is a Trojan Horse that uses the promise of success with girls to break through to a better you.”
— pg79
This idea is stolen from RSD Tyler’s The Blueprint.
In there, Tyler said: Guys ask me, what do I need to get girls? I have to learn game and approach? Ok. And they do it not realizing they’re becoming better people.
For me that’s a very common idea. I don’t take issue with anything that general.
Moving back into positive territory, sharing, being supportive:
— https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz9d4AV7WvA
This is Todd Valentines “The Art of Game Manifesto.”
It’s a very good talk. I’m not all the way through it yet, but he goes through model after model in game (“other people’s material”), GIVES CREDIT to those models (constantly refers to the men before him), and adds his personal stories and analysis.
This is value. This is the kind of man I respect.
Good for you, Todd. Excellent example… and interesting comments from you on game and these models. Smart and honorable.
todd is awesome. i only have a few of his old RSD videos saved. would love to be able to trade with other people and get more.
tom also has a great video where he talks about the best PUA sources to learn from. this is from 2015.
“Tom Torero lists his top pickup books for daygame, seduction and hustling.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO48fwVnCfQ
1. The Mystery Method (Mystery & Lovedrop)
2. The Evolution Of Desire (David Buss)
3. The Rational Male – Preventative Medicine (Rollo Tomassi)
4. Influence – The Psychology Of Persuasion (Robert Cialdini)
5. Pimp – The Story Of My Life (Iceberg Slim)
6. 48 Laws Of Power (Robert Green)
7. 60 Years Of Challenge Ebook Series
8. Story Of My Life (Casanova)
9. Getting Laid In NYC (Paul Janka)
10. Daygame (Tom Torero)
tom also has a great video on why the mystery method is so important. this is from 2014.
Why You Should Read “The Mystery Method”
“Mostly, the guys I’ve met via pickup are solid guys. I credit Rivelino for emphasizing camaraderie among this community of players. I’m on board with that, 100%. We have a great opportunity to help each other, to share, and to get better.”
thank you for this, nash. in this community, i can take off my social “everything’s great!” mask, and share my real struggles, real fears, and real feelings through my rivelino persona. and by doing this, i have connected with great men who have helped me get off the floor after my divorce. you are exactly right, we have a great opportunity here to help each other.
Thank YOU for that, Riv. That is leadership and a great attitude on your part.
Respect to you, my friend.
That’s such a thoughtful and generous comment. I’ve seen many of these from you.
Contrast this with comments from Rollo’s official right hand man who he guides people in his comment section to ask for advice on all things game. The dolt Yareally. Yareally has horrible social skills online with other men.
It’s amazing how people can see a guy with horrible, disastrous, online social skills, and think he’d be the guy to ask advice for about dealing with women.
YaReally is a keyboard warrior. A faker. It took me a little while to spot because he’s got such encyclopedic knowledge of RSD’s channel so he could dazzle with long posts I couldn’t be bothered to read. And I’m no night game expert. But I read a few and started to notice he’d say things that no competent player would ever say. It was like the hand salute in the Inglorious Basterds bar scene that exposes the spy.
Like Shanghai Bobby says, never trust someone that doesn’t post proof of their exploits.
http://shanghaibobby.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Who-to-Take-Dating-Advice-From.pdf.pdf
Do you have any examples?
This post is kinda strange. Seems like you put him on a pedestal and he broke your heart. I don’t disagree with any of your points, I’m not excusing Tom Torero but I think you’re kinda romanticising the pickup community at large. If you’re a player with real game, racking up serious numbers, and you’re NOT ruthless and self-centered in your thinking and dealings with both women and other men.. truth is, you’re an outlier. It is what it is. Ever banged a married woman? Tom has, he says so all the time in his stuff, and he has no problem with the morality of it. Where do you choose to draw the line and take the moral high ground? Quoting other PUA’s without credit? I’m just asking you to re-evaluate your expectations. Many guys fake infields, most of them inflate their notch counts. On the extreme end, some are openly, overtly racist, and some guys get banned from countries for chauvinist behaviour. Most of them are excellent at seducing women. It all is what it is. You’re holding Tom to a certain standard with all evidence suggesting he’d never reach it.
Interesting POV. Some comments:
>> Seems like you put him on a pedestal
Ummm, no. I liked the guy, said so several times. I’ve cited him. But no “romance” here. He has never made my list of favorite sources, even though I have studied him a lot.
>> If you’re a player with real game, racking up serious numbers, and you’re NOT ruthless and self-centered in your thinking and dealings with both women and other men.. truth is, you’re an outlier.
No… don’t agree. You’ll have to prove that claim before I’d personally take it seriously.
I think to see game that way is to have inner game issues (not referring to you, man)… which is exactly what I think of Tom. I think that is precisely Tom’s problem. Scarcity. Smallness. Fear. Neediness.
We are a range of guys. “Ruthless” isn’t a requirement at all, IMO. Talking to girls is a requirement… from there, we diverge into different schools.
I don’t claim to be top tier at all… but I don’t think top tier = endlessly ruthless. You have to push boundaries, I’m sure. I bet there is a subset of top tier that is incredibly “clean.” That is solid enough… no cheating is required. Only value, technique, frame, leadership, escalation… and joy… and gratitude. That’s possible.
Would you pursue a girl your wing was actively gaming? I wouldn’t. Even if he had no chance.
Why would I? There are more girls. A good wing is worth hundreds of approaches… endlessly ruthless is a ticket to isolation. Fuck that path.
Men with game don’t need to be endlessly ruthless… that’s small-minded, scarcity behavior.
>> Ever banged a married woman?
Yep. Tried to bang several. I have no problem with that. I realize it’s very complicated, and probably not a good idea. But I would do it specifically to learn more about why a woman would do that, how likely they are to do it, their mindsets while doing it, etc. I’m interesting in understanding that part of life… “extra-marital.”
That might make me a kind of scumbag… but a different scumbag than Tom is showing himself to be.
>> Where do you choose to draw the line and take the moral high ground?
I guess I am looking at a particular patch of moral high ground. That’s some level of integrity as men… particularly with respect to each other. Maybe that’s BS to you. I think INNER GAME alone is a reason to want to be more than “play or be played” kind of man. I’ll shun those men, and I’d be wise to do so.
There are too many women to be “zero sum” about all this. We can have integrity and still get laid. No conflict there.
In the case of this post… we don’t have to generalize too much. I wanted to deal with a specific feeling of disgust I had for Tom. I honestly was surprised to feel that way (it was hearing him talk in Stealth Seduction that started the trend). If I didn’t hear about the guy all the time, I would have moved away from him… moved on… but in daygame, he’s difficult to get away from.
I think Tom is intentionally stealing from this community. He knows he is doing it. I presented a lot of examples which are easy to verify.
Some guys like Brad P claim to have sort of found their own way, independent of the community. Tom clearly did not. He was “fed” by the work of other men. He now steals from them, those same men. That is a man I will shun.
Roissy remains a great example. Roissy… is close to ruthless. That whole school is cold and “sober” and I like that about them (even if I don’t try to model them). I respect them. Roissy endless credits other men… even while being “ruthless” at some level. He doesn’t need to steal IP. Neither does Tom.
So why does Tom? My game is inner game shit.
Tom…^ is a man I wouldn’t associate with. Incredibly low-value behavior from that guy.
>> You’re holding Tom to a certain standard with all evidence suggesting he’d never reach it.
Not at all. Super easy to give credit, or to say “I got this somewhere.” Or “a wise man once said…”
And a man that avoids that… is wanting credit where he does not deserve it. In the process, he shows himself to be as Runner said… a plagiarist.
This is really simple, actually.
Again, pretty much agree, it’s really simple. He’s proven with past behaviour his personal code of ethics is quite unique to him, so its not a stretch of the imagination that he’d do another thing that goes against what you believe right. If it looks like a bear, growls like a bear, moves like a bear it’s not hard to guess it’ll bite like a bear too.
Is it inner game issues? Could be, yeah. Although I think you’re being a bit presumptious with the fearful scarcity thing. Is it disgusting? In isolation, sure. But I find it interesting where people decide to draw boundaries as to what’s ok and what crosses a line. It’s easy to assume we all operate from the same book of do and don’t rules but especially as a bunch of guys who already go against the grain in many other ways, as you say, it’s much more complicated.
For what it’s worth I also don’t believe being a great player = being ruthless. It’s not even aspirational. Everyone is different like you say. However I’d invite you to really look at traits shared by many of the very best players you run with in real life. For want of clearer terminology, the machivellian is way more common than is talked about, for whatever reason. At least in my experience. And I’d imagine it’s hard behaviour to compartmentalise.
Anyway, thanks for your comments.
>> I find it interesting where people decide to draw boundaries as to what’s ok and what crosses a line.
Totally fair… and an interesting POV.
>> Anyway, thanks for your comments.
Thank you, man. Good to have you here.
Yup. Whenever I hear guys talk about larger harems that’s the tell that they are keyboard jockeys.
My method to keep girls attached is frequent sex, which usually means meeting two and sometimes more girls per day, and even then three plus a fuck buddy is topping it out – I still need time for work and possibly dating.
I don’t quite get how some guys keep girls in orbit with once a week sex. I’ve heard of it a lot, so I guess it happens, but it’s not something I can understand. I guess they must have things of value other than emotions and sex and bonding to provide.
Well, I did have one girl once that I kept limited to a Sunday once a week for a while, but of course she had many other guys, and was fine with slotting me in. We were in each others harems. But keeping a girl in your own harem is different than being fuck-buddies each with separate harems.
As for not giving credit, that’s a definite social faux pas. It’s greatly compounded by claiming credit. Simply using other peoples ideas without credit is a bid smelly, but not sinful. Using your own name or saying copyrighted alongside borrowed ideas is more than bad form – yes, that’s stealing, and yes, I can understand why that would be seen as a major inner game issue.
A core inner game issue.
Hey Xsplat.
>> My method to keep girls attached is frequent sex, which usually means meeting two and sometimes more girls per day
Per day??? Or per week?
>> I don’t quite get how some guys keep girls in orbit with once a week sex. I’ve heard of it a lot, so I guess it happens, but it’s not something I can understand.
I have some experience with this… so the idea is not weird to me.
Before I got into game, I met a girl at work, and we had wicked chemistry. For some reason, I didn’t want to claim her as my GF. I would fuck her 1X per week…for two years. I would rarely let her stay over. I honestly don’t even know why I was like that with her… I love it when girls sleep over, and I was completely AFC back then… but that’s how it went.
She was also… best sex of my life (at the time). A generous and kinky girl. It was beautiful, filthy, and very hot.
The girl I post about these days, Miss Thick, is also 1X per week. We’ve been doing this for 9 months now. She has never even asked about our status. Never pushed for more time, not at all. We seem well balanced to me. We like each other. Maybe even admire each other.
And she… is now the best sex of my life. I am amazed at our sex. I think it may have fucked up my game with other girls… I’m very into her, and very into the sex. More than that. I’ll write about her when I close out the year.
So I think SEX is a big part of why those girls stuck around… really good chemistry and sex.
nash,
i have been thinking about this issue you brought up. it’s an interesting and complicated topic. specifically, i am trying to understand your point of view regarding two ideas that are slightly paradoxical (i think): “there is nothing new under the sun” vs theft of individual tactics, routines, techniques, concepts.
without getting way too much into it, i remember a while ago, i was arguing that mystery was the godfather of game, that his “ACS” mystery method was genius, that it was groundbreaking — codifying how you need to go for attraction FIRST, and then go for comfort — and i was also arguing that yad was the godfather of daygame, and how the LDM was the next evolution in game — basically, here i was trying to understand pickup by trying to give credit to the great names in pickup and to their great inventions and concepts — and you said, bah, there is nothing new under the sun, there hasn’t been anything new in seduction in the past 50,000 years — and you repeated something similar in this post.
meanwhile, you note and get pissed off when tom steals beckster’s “hair, makeup, shoes” gambit — which, if he did, and it does seem like he did, is a shitty thing to do. stealing other people’s original contributions to pickup sucks because we all work so hard at figuring out women, and it’s not easy! —- and our “original contributions” are really all we have as far as our legacy to this mad, beautiful game.
i mean, there is no contradiction, but there is a **slight** contradiction, do you see it?
i was trying not to think about all this — in a way, it’s unproductive to get “caught in the weeds” of debating who gets credit for what, instead of focusing on the prize: girls, girls, and more girls! — but truthfully, i love the philosophical topics, so eventually i knew i would get sucked in — and so i started thinking about this again today because i looked up someone you mentioned casually:
james tusk
aka
https://project-tusk.com/
now, who the fuck is this guy, and how did you find him, i have no idea. i am constantly surprised by HOW MANY dudes are out their selling daygame coaching. in a way, i think i try to shield myself from all this because it can make me sad. i don’t even know why i get so sad — maybe because i like to see pickup as an art form, and not a shady business (?) — but anyway. james tusk. i took a look at his site, his youtube, a few of his videos. i started by checkout out his “top shop” link.
in your post, you wrote:
“So, I’m not sure who James Tusk is, but I have a pretty good idea that Tom knows who he is… as Tom wrote almost word for word what James said, exactly one day after James said it.”
now, here is my main argument against your post: who in the world is james tusk, and how can you castigate tom for stealing anything from him, even if he did?! i mean, this guy james seems to be really good at making videos — he’s done about 150 videos in 8 months! — but that’s my point, he’s been around for only 8 months! unless i am missing something major? i mean, this dude james just shows up, he is good looking and muscular, and all of a sudden he is up and running with his own business teaching daygame around the world — and what has **he** contributed to this beautiful art form we call game? what are his “original contributions” apart from his cute little observation that topshop is like a nightclub without any dudes?
hmm, interesting. i just looked him up again to see if i was missing something, and i found this comment on krauser’s blog (sept 2017):
ObiWan: Nick have you come across this fool “James Tusk” who is copying yours and Tom’s material and passing it off as his own on Youtube?
Krauser: I saw two of his videos. He appears to have his shit together. There’s a line with “fair use of concepts which are basically public domain” on one side and “blatant uncredited rip-off” on the other. I haven’t watched James enough to know how he chooses to negotiate this line.
https://krauserpua.com/2017/09/21/textbook-update/#comment-99665
very well said, krauser.
also, later in the same comment section, krauser writes more on james.
Krauser: James is a Chad who has turned his mind to daygame technique. He’s part of Jabba-World where dealing with women is almost entirely positive. That’s a different world to 95% of men. Normal men need a long process of detail and mental toughening in order to return to simplicity. James probably does have good technique but having never met him and not really watched his material, I wouldn’t like to offer an opinion on his game beyond this hypothetical.
https://krauserpua.com/2017/09/21/textbook-update/#comment-99706
now that’s actually really insightful and true, what krauser said. most of us have been so hurt by our failures with girls that we need to unlearn a lot of bad habits and also get tougher as men. it’s a fascinating and difficult process. few men have had a life like steve jabba, just loving women and having women love him back.
anyway, holy smokes, i am getting off topic. another main point of this comment was to introduce a second concept after the concept of camaraderie, and that concept is gratitude and respecting our elders — and here i am specifically talking about “tom torero vs james tusk”.
to be clear, i like your beckster example. from what i read in tom’s first book, beckster is an OG, so hell yeah, if tom takes one of beckster’s routines and calls it a “torero routine” that really sucks because beckster is an old school PUA — and thanks to these old school guys, we are getting laid with younger, more beautiful girls! i am very grateful to all those who came before me and showed me the way, and that includes beckster. the original PUAs deserve a ton of credit.
but to try and say that tom stole something from james tusk, a dude who showed up in 2017 — that’s not right.
the opposite: how much shit has james tusk stolen from tom, from nick, from yad, from mystery — fuck, maybe james even stole something from me! maybe i will be watching one of his videos and i will hear him say, “remember fellas, if she’s wearing high heels, she wants anal!” — haha actually that would be hilarious :-)
my personal theory: i love giving credit to those who came before me, because 1) i love the concept of gratitude, and of paying respect to my elders, i think it’s part of the abundant mindset, and also because 2) i have the academic inside me, and i love the idea of “showing off” that i have studied the greats, and that i have learned from them, and 3) i feel that it helps give weight to the argument when you site your sources.
obviously, not everyone is like that. some people are much more savvy, less romantic and idealistic. they don’t see pickup as an art form, they see it as a money machine.
speaking of money machine, if the game is to be believed — and i believe it — didn’t tyler and RSD steal mystery’s business right from under him? do you criticize tyler for this, or do just watch tyler’s videos without questioning the origins of his success?
i like to give mystery a ton of credit for all his “original contributions” to this world of seduction, and you don’t. from what i can tell, you don’t feel anybody stole anything from mystery — and yet tom stole from james tusk? that seems odd to me.
to me, everyone is standing on mystery’s shoulders. maybe i’m wrong. maybe that’s just the romantic in me.
Hey Riv.
>> i am trying to understand your point of view regarding two ideas that are slightly paradoxical (i think): “there is nothing new under the sun” vs theft of individual tactics, routines, techniques, concepts.
You’re right. There is **almost** a contradiction there. : ]
I do believe that “courtship” is so common, has been forever, that if you think you’ve done something “new” with a girl… you’re kidding yourself. That’s what I mean by “nothing new,” nothing “original.” Even Casanova learned from someone, and/or, someone used lines/mindsets that were the same as his… hundreds of years before he was born.
>> mystery… basically, here i was trying to understand pickup by trying to give credit to the great names in pickup and to their great inventions and concepts — and you said, bah, there is nothing new under the sun
I see your point. He made many important contributions to STRUCTURE, LINES and STYLE. But of course he didn’t “invent” ACS. Or “find, meet, attract, close.” They are descriptions, not inventions. He developed a system, much like LDM (which in a way, is also “find, meet, attract, close” = “nothing new”). Mostly I think that’s true.
However, if I said:
“Check out the NASH school of thought here… it’s all about FIND, MEET, ATTRACT, CLOSE. This is one of the special formulas in NASH GAME.”
That ^ would make me a fucking ass. In this example, I never even say that that is my thought exactly… but I imply to hell and back that it is my material (and new guys might assume it IS my material)… and THAT is what Sneaky Tom is doing in the community. He is doing it over, and over, and over. He is doing it consciously. That’s why he’s a thief.
It’s low class.
>> i mean, there is no contradiction, but there is a **slight** contradiction, do you see it?
Yeah. I see where you’re going. They are different points, but they rub up against each other.
>> it’s unproductive to get “caught in the weeds” of debating who gets credit for what, instead of focusing on the prize: girls, girls, and more girls! — but truthfully, i love the philosophical topics
I agree on both points. I’m not going to make a habit of doing this… but I don’t need to. There is something “special” about Tom that he has this pattern to him. Normally, I’d turn my back on a guy like him, forget about him… but that guy is hard to miss. And to your point, I like the philosophy, and I like the history and the community of “modern game.” Many of us do.
>> now, who the fuck is this guy, and how did you find him, i have no idea
I did a search for “topshop London daygame” and… he was the first guy to show up. It was like that. I was doing research for one of my NYC post’s.
>> who in the world is james tusk, and how can you castigate tom for stealing anything from him, even if he did?!
Now I think you’re way off track, Riv. I call bullshit on that POV.
Doesn’t matter if he’s new, or not good, or whatever… Tom fucking stole from him. Tom knows it. I know it. The evidence is easy to see. Saying “JAMES makes too many videos” is no justification for TOM stealing from James. Apples and oranges, man.
>> but to try and say that tom stole something from james tusk, a dude who showed up in 2017 — that’s not right.
Bullshit, dude. If some teenage girl writes a song, puts it on YouTube, and Madonna rips it… Madonna is a thief. That’s a perfect example. And why would she need to? She’s Madonna. She wouldn’t need to. But if she did do something like this… it would say quite a bit about her. And it says quite a bit about Tom that he does this like this.
Seniority and “rights to intellectual property” are not the same thing. You know that.
Was Tom here first? Yeah. Has he done more for daygame? Yeah. Did he steal from James. Yeah, he did. And that makes Tom a punk.
You claiming there is no theft in that instance (because of “seniority”) makes no sense.
My question is only “why?” Why would Tom need to do this?
And the timing on that one is wild… one day after James put out that video. That means Tom is actively watching James’ stuff, and then “borrowed” the TOPIC (Top Shop) and the LANGUAGE (“nightclub,” etc.). We are ALL allowed to be inspired… but why not 1.) Point out that James had said that the day before, or 2.) Talked about Selfridges or some other dept store instead?? That would be fine. Tom has a TON of his own unique experience… why steal when he doesn’t have to?
Why does Tom go out of his way to rip off other guys in our scene? This is the kind of thing that makes thing this is more than casual for Tom. It’s deep seated and weird.
My internal radar started telling me there was something weird about Tom. And as I sorted through his material… I started seeing specific examples… like this one. The Roissy one… put Tom beyond the pale. All of the examples do… but the Roissy theft is the nail in Tom’s coffin for me.
Tom is a greedy douchebag.
>> how much shit has james tusk stolen from tom
I don’t know. I don’t care. I don’t follow that guy. I think Krauser’s comments are right on. He might be cool… I don’t know.
None of this takes the filth off of Tom’s behavior, does it?
>> “remember fellas, if she’s wearing high heels, she wants anal!” — haha actually that would be hilarious :-)
Now you’re right on, Riv. THAT ^ is the difference between doing something original… and “saying” something original, in YOUR OWN VOICE. Having a line that is “yours.”
If Tom said “high heels means she is DTF,” no one would blink. That’s too general. But when Tom says, “I have this INTERNALLY FUCKED FRAME,” I would expect you to tell him to go fuck himself. That is what he doing to other guys. Nearly word for word. Why? Because he’s fuckhead.
>> speaking of money machine, if the game is to be believed — and i believe it — didn’t tyler and RSD steal mystery’s business right from under him? do you criticize tyler for this, or do just watch tyler’s videos without questioning the origins of his success?
You’re bringing up tangential points… none of this excuses Tom. It kind of feels like a smokescreen, Riv.
(To answer your point, thought… I think Mystery likely sucks at business. That’s my guess. Just like Yad sucks at business, vs Yosha. Yosha is not a cool guy IMAO, but he is clearly a very good business man, and he built Daygame.com, using Yad’s natural talent. I’m not particularly pro-Yad, but that’s a good comparison to the Mystery situation.)
>> i like to give mystery a ton of credit for all his “original contributions” to this world of seduction, and you don’t. from what i can tell, you don’t feel anybody stole anything from mystery — and yet tom stole from james tusk?
Tom followed James and Tom stole from James. That is just a fact. And it’s weird. Very weird.
But… and this is a completely different issue, Riv… Yeah, fucking Mystery did a ton for game. Yeah. I was making a completely different argument when you/I debated that point that day.
And Mystery’s contributions… also don’t take the stink off of Tom Torero.
………………
Hey… good discussion, man. Always cool to kick around game ideas with you.
Cheers… and respect to you, Mr Rivelino. Thank you.
Tusk had coaching from Torero, so it’s much more likely it was the other way round. lol
@Jay:
TUSK’s POST: — Aug02, 2017
SNEAKY TOM’S POST: — Aug03, 2017
So Tusk copied Sneaky Tom, but did it a day before Tom put his post out? He copied him “in advance??” Do you understand what copying someone means? “LOL.”
Love Tom if you want… but we have 5 or so examples here of plagiarism. And the one where he use’s Tusks IDEA for what to write about AND the words… is just laziness. That was a dumb, small thing to steal.
I was originally a fan, but I learned a lot about Tom’s (weak) character in the months around when I wrote this review. I presented a ridiculously detailed analysis. I pointed out how he loves the metaphor of being a “sneak” (he does)… or a “bandit” you might say. It’s endless with this guy. Now… everyone can decide for themselves.
We all use each other’s ideas. But we don’t all try to take credit for them, and rebrand them as our own. That takes a particularly kind of bullshitter – which is what Torero is.
I will never read anything from him again. But if you can learn from him (and what he stole from others), please do. And if you want to take anything he ever said and claim it is your original thought… seems like that would be cool too… that is what he is all about.
Zero respect for that guy.
But big love for Daygame.
Badass Buddah, part 5, 39:25
Take a look at this (year 2014), it’s no longer for sale but I’m sure most of you have seen this product and keep it in your hard drive.
“3 criteria, from my mate Rob, from Beckster… Again, oldie but goldie…”
I never post any messages but I follow some of your blogs from time to time. I rememberd Tom had paid credit to Beckster somewhere.
[…] to write about this topic of “original contributions” vs theft in the pickup community. my comment on nash’s […]
I should have included in the comment that I don’t really have that system working in my life right now – only two girls I see, and I’m not trying to keep them exclusive. Before that also my situation was not about running around seeing the girls all the time.
I was talking about what I was doing about two years ago, and for some years before that. Yes, per day.
A dozen years or so ago I started to have experience with seeing two girls in the same day. Made me feel like a king! Wow! So naturally I turned that happenstance into a lifestyle. Then a lifestyle system.
So I became quite comfortable with seeing at least two girls in a day. To manage the libido I managed my orgasms, and did chi-kung and lifted weights, ate well, plenty of rest, etc. With that system libido was never a limiting factor – only time was.
Lately I’ve almost forgotten how to fuck. To my surprise I’m coming more. I guess I don’t want to be holding so much libido in my body, because I don’t have enough lovers that I’m into to share that high voltage energy with. I think a lot of guys also don’t feel too comfortable being too horny – we relase that tension with jerking off. But releasing that tension becomes a habit that is difficult for the body to break. I’m going to have to go back to kindergarden and relearn what was once just a natural habit – as if I’m learning to drive a car again after a bad stroke.
I do think it’s down to not having appropriate lovers.
Like I said, I turned a happenstance into a lifestyle, into a lifestyle system. I’ve thought deeply about and systematized what works and why. Having three or more girls, and occasional dates, greatly increases my libido. Increased libido when increased opportunity is natural to mammals, and is called the Coolidge effect. Chi-kung and not coming GREATLY increases this effect.
So ya on some days I’d see three or four girls. I remember 5 visits one day, and I was still horny. Thats tail end of the bell curve, but it’s not down only to high libido – it’s also the full system working.
About keeping girls on a once per week rotation, ya, I did that once, although I tend not to because if I’m into a girl why not see her more? Both usually want it. I didn’t see that girl more, because I was ONLY into the sex, and preferred other girls for hanging out time. Later I’d see her more often, but usually leaving one girl in my bed, and then going to visit the fuck buddy in the middle of the night. Later we did see each other more – sexually it got quite intense – I think I came 11 times with her once – probably my record. But anyway, I wanted to make the distinction between having a harem, and having a fuck buddy. If she is not exclusive – if she has her own harem, it’s not really a haren, is it?
“chi-kung” I was just going to recommend that.
That’s good to hear. I’m hearing more guys start to talk about meditation and chi-kung.
I read long ago that there are hubs of influence, and that inputs into that hub make the 6 degrees of separation connections.
So although I’ve had my own blog for going on 10 years, most of my influence, I think, will have come from posting on other blogs, or from main writers reading my blog, and chewing on my ideas and fitting them into their own.
Meditation is widespread in the culture, and a natural fit to self improvement, however it’s great to see people fit that seamlessly into their notions of game, and if I’ve had any influence to add more momentum to that ball, that would be cool.
I used to never hear about people not coming during sex. Now that seems to be a thing.
Chi-kung was extremely fringe back when I was in the states. Like a favorite album in a record collection though, it somehow started to catch on in my community, after people caught wind of it, seemingly from hearing it first from me. And again it was the bigger influencers that were the hubs – I just happened to influence the influencers.
This is a reason why I sometimes take pains to correct harmful views of major influencers, and have done so with Roissy, Rollo, and Roosh. I know for sure that my efforts have seen good fruits. Although I do seem to remain rather invisible.
Do you remember how you came to learn about Chi-kung?
Chi-kung – when I was 17 or so, in a book at my aunt’s place. I started using to jerk off without losing energy. I proved useful to remain young, and to be able to manage a harem once I got Game about 20 years later
That’s a rare receptivity. Ya, that happens – while other people are working hard to ignore some stuff, others soak it in greedily.
Right book at the right time.
I remember an old translation of an ancient daoist text about what we now call chi-kung. It was all in secret code, talking about inner cauldrons and drops and so forth. Hidden away ignored in a bookshelf, meaning nothing to nobody, but I found it quite influential. History coming alive, again.
I was unclear – I’ve written extensively about harmful views, in many blog posts and comments, however it’s never been the influencer who changed his opinion, but the readers of the influencers.
The sphere, on the whole, has been correcting itself. In places it gets mighty fucked up, but as it grows, it’s been self-correcting.
That’s very important to me, personally, and some people can’t seem to understand why. As if caring about your brothers is an impossibility. Or worse yet a social faux-pas imposition.
You’re talking nonsense. Tom didn’t steal that idea from James Tusk. If he stole anything, it was only the idea to tell guys that topshop is good for girls; although he already told guys that years ago anyway. The actual idea to go and find girls in Topshop is not new at all and I distinctly recall the daygame.com guys advising daygamers to approach girls in Topshop well before Tusk even had a youtube channel. In fact Yad was banned from Topshop years ago for approaching too many girls in there. So Tom hasn’t stolen any ideas about daygame in Topshop or any ideas about how good it is for daygame or even any ideas about telling guys that it is good for daygame from Tusk. If anything, James Tusk took that idea from Tom because Tom spoke about it years before Tusk did; and Tusk was coached by Yad when he worked with Daygame.com – a company Tom worked for when Tusk was coached by them about 5 years ago according to himself.
I wonder where Tusk got the idea to approach girl’s in Topshop? Hmm it is a very original thought isn’t it. Actually no, no it’s not. Probably every daygamer who has done a few hundred approaches has figured out that girls don’t just walk around near shops but – amazing this next part – girls also go into shops. Dude no fucking way, girls are inside shops too? Yes. Girls can be found in shops. If you’re regularly daygaming in London then it would almost be weird if you’ve never approached in Topshop; Oxford St was daygame central for years and Topshop is one of the most popular shops on the whole street – including being a meeting point for the Saturday Sarge when it existed. So what if Tusk wrote a tweet the day before Tom did – maybe it just reminded Tom about one of his old haunts in London. You can hardly call that theft. At most it was just a reminder.
>> You’re talking nonsense.
Hey man. It’s a long post. With many examples. All of them are nonsense??
>> I wonder where Tusk got the idea to approach girl’s in Topshop? Hmm it is a very original thought isn’t it. Actually no, no it’s not.
We are in agreement.
That was WHY I went looking for quotes about Top Shop in the first place… because I know that Top Shop is a London game thing. I was surprised to see Top Shop in NYC when I was there… and I thought of all the guys that mention Top Shop in the LDM. It was fun for me to pick up there… I felt like I was in the lineage of the LDM… which I respect, very much.
>> So what if Tusk wrote a tweet the day before Tom did – maybe it just reminded Tom about one of his old haunts in London. You can hardly call that theft. At most it was just a reminder.
Tusk made a VIDEO about it. And in the video… Tusk called it a “nightclub.” And played up the idea that there are no other guys there. And Tom, the very next day, also called it… a nightclub. And also played up the lack of other guys.
One day after, man. It’s a video… not a Tweet. So Tom had to sit around and watch it… to hear the language and poach that concept.
Of course gaming girls in stores is not original. I never claimed that. Of course Top Shop is no secret.
I claimed Tom has a PATTERN of poaching not only concepts but the EXACT WORDS of other men. And I proved it… over and over.
And that isn’t true of most of us. Sneaky Tom is a little “special” that way.
I only meant you’re talking nonsense by calling him a thief. Fair enough regarding your criticisms of his book. Some of the examples you gave of his game advice above are surprisingly bad game. I don’t have a problem with that.
I didn’t realise it was a video and I can see where you’re coming from but I think it’s harsh to call him a thief. You’re focusing a lot on the word nightclub as though that means he copied it word for word. I’ve said to people that a shopping mall is “better than a nightclub” when telling stories about daygame. I imagine other guys have too.
Most guys focus on nightclubs as places to go to pick up girls. Think about it, ask the average guy on the planet “where would you go to pick up girls?” they will tell you “nightclub”. A nightclub is essentially the venue for picking up girls in the male psyche. So if somebody wants to sell the benefits of daygame, a comparison to a nightclub is hardly surprising. But why is it better than a nightclub? Loads of girls, no competition, no entry fee, and you don’t need to pay for drinks. Now I haven’t watched Tusk’s video but I wouldn’t be surprised if he mentioned any of those things as benefits. A shopping mall, or a big shop like Topshop is an example of a structure that resembles a nightclub, but where you do daygame. It’s not an original concept, even word for word.
Why did Tom mention it the day after Tusk posted a video about it? Well you seem to be on point in saying Tom got the idea to talk about it from Tusk. It is too coincidental. Ok is he a thief? Why is he looking at other coaches material if not to steal it? I don’t agree that he is stealing anything or looking to steal anything. He is just looking at the competition, what are they talking about, are there any areas of his own game he himself hasn’t covered that other people are discussing, is there anything that other people are doing that could help him market his business better? I don’t think any of that is theft. It’s all normal business practice.
As regards the other examples I don’t find them all that persuasive. The Beckster routine is probably the best example you gave to support the idea that Torero is a thief. Ok maybe Beckster created it. But it was an old routine. Torero published Street Hustle years after Beckster invented that. Tom probably knows he is spinning Beckster’s lines. Even still, I wouldn’t say that makes him a thief. So much of the pua canon has been reshaped by guys who make things their own. But in doing so they also create important innovations. I’m sure Tom has his own innovations in his book. What he has written in Street Hustle is a guide to how he does his daygame; I assume that is it anyway – it would be weird if he wrote a book filled with techniques which he himself doesn’t use. I’m not sure who said it – Krauser I think – but some pua said that pretty much every game textbook written since the Mystery Method essentially follows what Mystery set out in his model. But that doesn’t mean that everything written since then is the same or not substantially different. Essentially I’m saying that if you read any book about game nowadays, you can be sure that pretty much some of it is guaranteed to have been written about by somebody else. I take your point that Torero is using almost the same words as other people in some examples, but that doesn’t make him more of a thief than many others writing about game – it just makes him a bit lazy for not being more creative with his word choice. Torero has a pretty large body of work online now in the form of videos, products and articles. Is a substantial part of that taken from other people? If not then I don’t see how calling him a thief is fair.
Torero has been criticised for his ethics a few times over the years by different people. Maybe you’re right that he is slimy or untrustworthy. In fact I know a couple of people who did skype coaching with Torero and they said there was something a bit shady about him, that they didn’t trust everything he was saying (they also said he had some good daygame advice though). So you’re probably right that he is untrustworthy. A lot of people come to that conclusion about him. But you’re calling him a thief and that just seems extreme. Has he plagiarised his whole body of work or even a substantial proportion of it? If he has then you’re right. But the arguments you’ve made don’t prove that and that’s why I don’t agree that he is a thief. Now if you want to be pedantic and say any transgression is unacceptable then I can see why you’re saying he is a thief – but I don’t agree with that argument and I think everybody is entitled to a few transgressions here and there especially minor ones like those you’ve cited. The examples you’ve given aren’t that important and they’re an insignificant part of Torero’s output on the whole. So calling him a thief is out of place.
The TL;DR version of what I’m saying is that you’re overreacting a little, making a big thing out of not very much.
[…] messed up to really succeed at the highest levels of conscious game. Nash’s post “Tom Torero is a Thief | Street Hustle Book Review” got me thinking about these issues (be sure to read the comments on that post as well, as […]
good that krauser is back to calling the mystery method “the foundation”. for a while he was saying it wasn’t.
“Harvey, my frustration isn’t with you personally – it’s with scammers generally and RSD in particular. I guess I write in strong language simply because RSD annoy me. Before you read ANY other nightgame stuff, read The Mystery Method and the 60 Years Of Challenge 4-book PDF set. That’s the foundation. I’d also recommend Assanova’s ebooks if you can find them. K.”
https://krauserpua.com/2017/12/07/book-update-in-colour/#comment-101430
That ^ is a good thread, those comments.
Hey Riv… I have a copy of MM. I presume I’ll be very busy, but I’ll bring it to Japan. It’s time I read it.
awesome.
the lovedrop CDs are great too:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fg14x040hrdpo5l/AABN8hEYtWWgVj0Qe8IM5HSca?dl=0
@Nash As you know I thought this post would be hard post to pull off. I was of the opinion that this was akin to one politician calling another politician a “liar!”….so what??? Tell me something I don’t know.
Calling out a self-described hustler as lacking morals/integrity/etc seems futile.
I have thought a little a more and although I still wouldn’t have done something similar, any community that is worthwhile, does need to be self-policing. My standards for calling people out are significantly lower than yours, but it doesn’t in any way shape or form mean it shouldn’t be done. We all have our own thresholds.
I think an easy work around is what Krauser did on the last pages of Nitro, or as many other have done in “real” non-ficition have a list of acknowledgments. Tom, being a self-described academic, is surely aware of this idea.
It might be as simple as not wanting to lose the most coveted of all assets in the internet age…attention. If Tom gives credit, maybe he thinks people go search for magic bullets outside his ecosystem???
Hey, Sundance.
>> Calling out a self-described hustler as lacking morals/integrity/etc seems futile.
It depends on what we mean… but I’m not at all convinced that we are “anarchists” as men of game. I would avoid the word “moral” here, but we have certain basic standards, perhaps.
“Honor among thieves” sort of. A “hunter’s code” perhaps.
I think if some guy presumes that because he is interested in game that he is amoral, that is a sign that he has inner game issues, indeed.
We’re not saints. True. That’s not my goal.
But I think the hunter analogy might be more apt than “hustler.” Hunters can be savage as part of the hunt, they go after what they want, they employ strategy, they kill and eat their prey… but there is no lying and stealing involved. It’s a hunt. It’s bold. It’s proud. Chin up, chest out. I love it.
#daygameisnotacrime
>> I think an easy work around is what Krauser did on the last pages of Nitro, or as many other have done in “real” non-ficition have a list of acknowledgments.
Yeah. Good solution. It’s honorable. Krauser is not a “nice guy,” but he is an honorable man.
>> It might be as simple as not wanting to lose the most coveted of all assets in the internet age…attention. If Tom gives credit, maybe he thinks people go search for magic bullets outside his ecosystem???
Yeah. I think you’re on track there. In the “additive” sense, anything that works to get him followers would be a good thing. In the “subtractive” sense, any time he links out… “he loses power.” Which is not even true, but I can see how he might think that. Roissy is a great example of someone that constantly links out… and is incredibly powerful as an analyst and a curator. It’s small to think otherwise.
If a man is afraid to admit that anyone else talks about a given idea… it could be inner game issues. I think that’s a fair read of a man that behaves like that.
Perhaps akin to only having dates in isolated locations… because you’re afraid “she will look at another man.” Which would be a sign that man is terribly insecure. Something like that… maybe.
Cheers to you, man.
[…] YOHAMI says: […]
I’ve been taking a more critical look at Tom since you posted this. It finally clicked in his latest video what feels off about him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtjXcJ_PDaw
He continually tries to build this image of himself as a hustler: dirty. grimy. mucky. kinky.
It feels fake. It’s all image, all marketing.
Look at his body language https://ibb.co/cnALpm
That’s all you need to know
You think he’s leaning in too much? Supplicating?
All his body posture and language all the time in every infield I’ve seen from him is of a low value man/creep with no game
I’ve learned a lot from Tom. However I think some parts of his products are fake and some of them are real. He may be a cheater. Furthermore He’s almost never released his footage of infield rejections . What’s your opinion?
I have complicated feelings about “Sneaky Tom,” but I increasingly think he is fucking tool. I would probably be a dick if I ever had to see him in person.
Men don’t like weakness, and I sense weakness in him, in his inner game, and it encourages a mean side of me. I bet I’m not the only one.
I think his products are “real,” and have some good knowledge in them. I like BadAss Buddha, in particular… I think that was his last good moment, personally.
I have learned from him, I have said so. I think he is a good daygamer, likely one of the best, and that he has good stuff to teach…
Increasingly, I think he can ONLY offer teaching at the basic/intermediately level. I think he lacks the true insight/intellect/inner-confidence to bring a deeper truth or progression… even though he has more than enough experience to do so.
He is all about patching together bits from here/there. That is about his lack of confidence and lack of a true inner compass… he doesn’t have a mind of his own. That is the same reason why his textbook is so/so at best, and why he is a filthy poacher, constantly needing to steal from other men (greater than him) and then… claim that shit as his own. Fuck him for that. To me that is his crime… the rest is just inner game shit.
Read Daygame Infinite by Krauser… and you will see what real intellectual confidence looks like. Krauser is the real deal… and I bet the girls that date Krauser have a much different experience than TT. “Sneaky Tom” is just like all his heroes in the movies he’s always yammering about it… he’s a faker. He is a fraud. It’s central to his character… which is weak and fundamentally small. He really IS getting girls… I don’t doubt that… but he hasn’t seduced himself yet… that is his problem. My guess is that the experiences he can offer girls are shallow and uncertain as well.
I get to play “the Devil” here… and I have come to show him himself. “Game is a mirror.” I bet this conversation terrifies him.
And he is cunt. And won’t face me, or any of this, which makes him more of a cunt. And I openly disrespect him for it.
I think he did read this post because after it he brought Beckster on his podcast to do an interview to show they are on good terms and to give him some credit.
I noticed that the guys on Tom’s documentary Hustle On, the ones he taught, also look like they are acting. I think him, as their teacher, instilled into them technique over true confidence, which is turning his students into a version of himself at some level.
Yeah, I saw that, and couldn’t believe it. I do think he did that to try to wash over my claim… sounds ego-y of me, but I do think it’s a reaction from him. Again, his timing is not subtle.
(He should have shut up, and just starting going out of his way to give credit going fwd. That would have been a way to build a better future. A comment on this post would have been super high-integrity, but no one is accusing him of that.)
And if you notice (and pls don’t link to more of his shit here… his material is not welcome here), but in that video… to Beckster, he says, “I think I gave you credit, but if I didn’t…” And he trails off. It’s amazing. He is such a cunt. Even then, perhaps after having known I called him out… he walks right up to it… but won’t admit it. Such a little boy. He is arrested. I’m sure of it.
That ^ is a complete lack of integrity. Still trying to weasel, even voice-to-voice with Beckster. It’s such a 1/2 measure. That is not what a man looks like.
And then.. soon after, he posted about the “source of his material,” which was vague BS as well. And he let all his fans say over and over how “original” he is… and he took that… and thanked them. I think he was trying to find a way to take some internal pressure off himself.
No respect for that guy. We make our own beds… and I’m sure his is very uncomfortable.
So… I unsubscribed from everything of his… and now… I rarely have to think about the guy.
What a tool As we know he steals so much of what he teaches, we can feel safe knowing we’ll learn it somewhere else.
And Daygame Infinite is just the medicine I needed to get over the headache of that guy and my experience with his book. The comparison is healing. It’s a great book.
>>And Daygame Infinite is just the medicine I needed to get over the headache of that guy and my experience with his book. The comparison is healing. It’s a great book.
I hope you’ll post a First Impressions Review of Daygame Infinite, just sharing how you believe it’s changing Daygame forward :)
I’ve watched a footage on youtube which claims that Tom has a fake infield. I’ve read about that in Krauser’s blog too. However that infield is similar to his other infield.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9RX7tOq9TU
I’ve watched Krauser’s infield too. In my opinion Those seem real but not that useful to learn from it.
That video should be illegal
George, I think you’re smart to use your own judgment for things like this. I believe strongly that if we are credible “social wizards,” we should be able to read situations for ourselves. That one isn’t super easy to read, actually… she seems relatively real… and he seems rushed, and uncool, and likely because he knows he’s cheating here.
…but it doesn’t matter, in this case. As this is the most well documented fraud in daygame.
https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-43228.html
“My answer to the biggest question first. Yes, the girl in the kiss close video (Francesca Cherruault) is an actress who I both know and hired.”
— Sneaky Tom
This ^ is from the statement Tom wrote at the time. This is all fact. Don’t defend him here.
The actress Sneaky Tom paid for the video, put it on her resume, that’s how it all came out… karma for dirty Tommy. It cost him his position with Daygame.com, or something like that.
Krauser wrote about it:
https://krauserpua.com/2014/12/12/tom-torero-fakes-an-infield-kiss-close/
It is not a “claim” that Tom felt like he needed to fake a kiss close (presumably to catch up with Yad), it’s a well documented fact. Tom admitted to it. Just get that.
And he was burned by it. He kind of “went away” at the time. I was a fan of his back then, and I felt bad for him… even as I was disappointed.
The question is not has he faked shit. That is fact. Or does he steal shit. Also, well documented fact. The question is… why? And if he got burned once… why KEEP DOING IT? Stealing from Roissy as recently as last Nov?? That was a very obvious theft. To claim it as one of his “dirty tricks.” It’s douchey and small. Why do it?
He’s greedy. He is trying to score points with guys that follow him… he should have enough of his own material… his fans aren’t all that sophisticated, it wouldn’t take that much to impress most beginners. And he could tell personal stories (which he rarely does), instead of stealing other guys techniques… which seems to be his preferred thing. It’s retarded of him.
The guy is a bit fucked up. There is something desperate about him. I can I see it now, and it’s repulsive. I bet the girls see it too. I said it over and over in this post… it was his infield footage. All that time with him… it was gross, and it took me a long time to figure out why. I used to love the guy, and paid for that product with my own cash.
And… if you read Krauser’s Daygame Infinite… you will see immediately what Lil’ Sneaky is missing. Krauser doesn’t need to steal, because he is CONFIDENT and can derive his own material from his field ex. We know Tom has plenty of field ex… but he cannot bring the level of content Krauser can, because Lil’ Sneaky is too unsure of himself.
He has no confidence, because his inner game is shit. That is the lesson here.
THAT ^ is why he steals. He is greedy. He is full of character flaws. AND… he isn’t confident enough in himself to drive his own thinking. His confidence SUCKS, and it will continue to, as he tries to “cheat his way into success.” Of course that does not feel good on the side.
He hates himself, so he steals…as he trusts other men more than he trusts himself. Of course he does.
He needs to face himself. My bet is… he won’t. He’s too small.
He even stole that bit from James Husk… which was “nothing.” It was the simplest thing… but Tom is THAT unsure of himself, that he is running around looking for shit to “use.” He has no foundation.
Don’t defend the dude about the stealing/lying. It’s well documented. You can like him all you want, and learn from him, fine. But don’t swim against the facts of his record.
In that fake video – check the body language. She’s solid and he’s puffy. He doesn’t have ground and wavers. She is pushing him away, he’s clingy. The energy of the conversation is not there. When he goes for the kiss she pushes him away, then he clinges to and forces himself into her while she hopes it all ends soon.
So everything in that video is what you should NOT do, ever.
That this passed as an instructional video and he thought it was a good idea to showcase his talents – that’s the crime.
Tnx dude. I didn’t defend Tom. I said Krauser’s infield is real but not that useful.
I think Tom doesn’t have the only one fake infield. Fifty percents of his products may not be real. Fifty percents of his advices may not work well.
Now let’s wait for the blog post that exposes Krauser for having ripped off GLL’s concepts starting with Daygame Mastery without mentioning his name in the book once. I suspect I’ll be the one to write that.
[…] the spot that the man should look elsewhere on the spot. An opinion that is a blatant tell of a keyboard jockey; no experienced charismatic man could possibly hold that […]
[…] with Antony (who is mentioned) and Krauser (who is not). If you want the negative take, Nash has you covered. I don’t have a strong view on the issue. I’m also in a different world, as my entire […]
Good article – I agree with everything you said. I recently noted Tom stealing from others than mentioned above, as well. I’d have preferred if I avoided him from the beginning. There are unfortunately people in the world, who want to make money through lies, scamming, and stealing, and Tom seems like he is one of them.
you think Tom is watching James Tusk videos LOL… tom trained tusk, tusk is the guy at the front row of the girlfriend sequence seminar learning from Tom, and you think tom is watching tusk lol funny that…
okay so you mention how creating drama for women is bullshit, well as tom mentioned in his book, its a counterintuitive statement that beta guys wouldn’t understand, so I guess it makes you beta… yes you DO create drama, and if you don’t girls WILL, this is why they cause arguments for no reason, they want the drama, they want to feel alive, … if you actually watched toms videos, hes make videos on this topic on what he means by creating drama, I guess you missed it, too bad, but stop acting like a little bitch because you dont know how to do it ….
Irrelevant.
Go look at the time stamps of when the two videos were posted. And Tom’s post about the same topic, using the same language, a day/so after Tusk.
Yeah… I think Tom needed content for his “look at me” machine, liked the idea, wanted it, repurposed it as his own. Same as all the other examples in the post. That was Tom’s nature.
[…] However, he had many detractors, some of who claimed that Tom stole his day-game method (street hustle) from someone else. […]
Since this is becoming the internet’s catch-all thread for PUA plagiarism and phoniness, here’s my contribution to the subject:
Self-improvement vs. Game
http://maleprivilege.net/viewtopic.php?t=169
Enter the Overman
http://maleprivilege.net/viewtopic.php?t=170
On the Genealogy of Deception
http://maleprivilege.net/viewtopic.php?t=171
If you want to know in what ways precisely Krauser too is weak (because it’s weakness we’re really discussing here; no one really cares who stole what from whom; plagiarism is just a symptom of weakness), read the above chapters. And I have a couple more coming soon.
On the subject specifically of Tom, I am writing a review of his work, but for now I will offer a rebuttal to Nash above. Nash claims that Tom stole because Tom had shit inner game, because he didn’t have enough confidence, etc. But people steal for various reasons. Mostly because they want things they don’t have. It doesn’t even have to be about greed: poor people steal as well as rich people. People steal to get more stuff. It doesn’t get simpler than this. You could be the most confident guy in the world and STILL steal. Simply because you want more stuff. And confidence has NOTHING TO DO with the amount of material you can produce! Jesus christ, Nash. Really? Super-confident guys have “material” coming out of their ears? Plenty of super-confident rock-solid guys out there whose brains just aren’t wired to generate “PUA material”. You can make all sorts of arguments against Tom if you want, but there’s zero causal connection between confidence and volume of material produced. PLENTY OF CRAP PUAS PRODUCE PLENTY OF CRAP ORIGINAL PUA MATERAL. Maybe they don’t steal, but their stuff is still crap! I don’t know about you, but I would rather read good plagiarized stuff than bad original stuff. In Tom’s case, maybe he wasn’t witty enough, or inventive enough to produce much material, so he took others’ material. Maybe he was just lazy. But at least he was smart enough to find the good material! Did he plagiarize some of it? Sure. But Roosh and Krauser have done worse, and no one is dunking on them here. If you don’t know what I am talking about, read my links above, and there will soon be more.
This thread is a treasure-trove on analysis on Tom, but there is a lot more to say on the subject, and I will be saying it soon. I’ll link it here when it’s ready.