[Heathree]

(08-15-2014 01:48 AM)Kieran Wrote:  

Thanks for the link WIA. Good stuff.

I've posted about this before, but I really like Juggler's old stuff (maybe I'm just biased because his was the first stuff that really resonated with me, and that I used to great success). His method is based around the idea that you are the prize, which was way ahead of the likes of Mystery who was still teaching negs etc. at the time, which seems to be coming from the frame of the girl's value being higher than your own. It also teaches the fundamentals of conversational skills (make statements and ask open ended questions), how to escalate (statements of intent), and how to sexualise an interaction (sexual barriers) in a very simple, easy to apply way.

I think a lot of people were probably put off by how he encourages you to be quite open and speak in an emotional way, but it's not really about deep conversations. It's more that you give a little away to prompt her to give a little, then reward her for that investment and use it to escalate the interaction. If she doesn't want to invest, then you break rapport by vacuuming, teasing her answer, etc.

Not perfect, but well worth a look, especially for those with sub-par conversational skills.

Juggler used to be my favourite methodology. At the time, as well as learning pickup skills, I wanted to become a good conversationalist. It was certainly good for the latter but I am not too sure if he should be the go to guy for pickup. His approach is nicey nice, just no the way to go.

[jariel]

WIA,

I think the focus has changed.

Initially this whole thing was about finding high quality women to have relationships with, now it's geared more towards how to get sex from low quality women.

The caliber of "students" has changed subsequently, and basically the business side of the game saw the shift, and adjusted it's endgame accordingly so the dollars would keep coming in.

[OzzieBlue]

There was an instructor that worked for juggler he had a blog flowered path or so that man wrote about seduction in such a romantic way I'd have let that pimping son of a gun date my sister. I always resonated with the teachings of players like Zan who came off like they genuinely love women. You know the whole leave her better than you found her code. Throughout the rough times when the heauxs showed me no love I still had love for them I had to I'm the bigger man.

[jariel]

(08-15-2014 06:20 AM)OzzieBlue Wrote:  

There was an instructor that worked for juggler he had a blog flowered path or so that man wrote about seduction in such a romantic way I'd have let that pimping son of a gun date my sister. I always resonated with the teachings of players like Zan who came off like they genuinely love women. You know the whole leave her better than you found her code. Throughout the rough times when the heauxs showed me no love I still had love for them I had to I'm the bigger man.

I love women, but I can't respect what they've allowed themselves to become. Before we paint them as victims, they've made choices to be with the types of men who don't leave them better than they found them, so the responsibility for that has to lie on their doorsteps. We all know every guy isn't a winner, so if she picks losers, then she is a reflection of what she chooses, and I don't want a loser.

The sobering reality is rather simple to grasp. If you want a top-notch woman, you have to be a top-notch man. Women don't date down. Men think they do because sometimes they see an attractive woman with a guy that don't personally deem to be attractive, but that goes one of two ways:

1. Either that guy is a winner in a variety of other areas in life, so she's not really dating down.

2. She looks good, but she's a low-quality person, so she's dealing with a low-quality, "safe" man.

Top-notch women bring more to the table than their attractiveness, their attractiveness is what the whole world gets to see, top-notch men get a reserved ticket to see beyond the physical layers.

What many of us are trying to do, is graduate to that level of accomplishment, what we've found out is that it takes a hell of a lot of work to get there, but that's why we're men, we embrace the challenge, we want to be winners, and we want the byproducts of winning; at least some of us do.

I'm off to the gym.

[RockHard]

(08-15-2014 03:56 AM)Heathree Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:48 AM)Kieran Wrote:  

Thanks for the link WIA. Good stuff.

I've posted about this before, but I really like Juggler's old stuff (maybe I'm just biased because his was the first stuff that really resonated with me, and that I used to great success). His method is based around the idea that you are the prize, which was way ahead of the likes of Mystery who was still teaching negs etc. at the time, which seems to be coming from the frame of the girl's value being higher than your own. It also teaches the fundamentals of conversational skills (make statements and ask open ended questions), how to escalate (statements of intent), and how to sexualise an interaction (sexual barriers) in a very simple, easy to apply way.

I think a lot of people were probably put off by how he encourages you to be quite open and speak in an emotional way, but it's not really about deep conversations. It's more that you give a little away to prompt her to give a little, then reward her for that investment and use it to escalate the interaction. If she doesn't want to invest, then you break rapport by vacuuming, teasing her answer, etc.

Not perfect, but well worth a look, especially for those with sub-par conversational skills.

Juggler used to be my favourite methodology. At the time, as well as learning pickup skills, I wanted to become a good conversationalist. It was certainly good for the latter but I am not too sure if he should be the go to guy for pickup. His approach is nicey nice, just no the way to go.

I remember hearing about Juggler but couldn't place his stuff. Found a pretty good summary here: http://www.thepuablog.com/essence-of-juggler-method/

Highlights:

* Don’t kill the connection by using cocky/funny - this has sunk me many times. It's easy to cross the line from C&F to unredeemable asshole
* don’t be cool, be warm. Charisma game!
* Genuine reward. Practice to say "I really like you, you are so …"

there's an outline of escalation in there that seems useful

Quote:

-ask interesting questions (use vacuum if needed)
-relate in I-perspective (that means you have to talk about your emotions and experiences)
-reward her when she puts effort into dialogue and escalate
-at one point make a statement of intent (instead of a reward)
-then use sexual barriers

[Vicious]

(08-14-2014 01:04 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(08-14-2014 09:52 AM)Vicious Wrote:  

I would go so far to state that some of the old pick-up material is BETTER on covering the fundamentals than what is "current". A lot of the stuff that's hot right now is very top heavy with psuedo-science, feminist bashing and/or race theory. To the degree that something as simple as hitting on girls becomes a political exercise.

A lot of the stuff I read today seems to ignore the fundamentals. Turn of the millennium pickup was very focused on being the men's response to The Rules or other books in the self help section. Women were not yet the enemy of smartphone toting, man shaming, feminazis.

But a lot of the stuff is before internet "dating" and so called hookup culture. Marginal chicks have so many options, yet so few options from their perspective. Cute chicks and sexy chicks are worse off, and you can forget about the top ten percent.

The Instagram chick in some down market like a Dallas or Atlanta can command the attention of powerful men that was once only the purview of top bitches on top markets.

The value of pussy has been greatly inflated, and the thirst keeps pushing the price up.

It really seems so quaint

While this is true someone getting into game shouldn't even concern himself with what's happening on social media. Those are nuances that you can start commanding when you are at a higher level.

In the end, the most bang for your buck comes from just being out there and pushing it in person on the streets, bars, clubs etc.

[horn]

(08-15-2014 03:38 AM)Biologist Wrote:  

. The rise of smartphones, dating sites/apps, Facebook and Instagram has made gaming significantly more difficult for the average guy.

I dunno. Maybe. If you can't garner a girl's attention for 5-20 mins so she can put FB down and give you her digits/iDate...maybe you aren't that interesting?
Or maybe she's just taken. Maybe FB/ig have replaced the 20-30 min convo that turns into a light blowoff. In the old days you think you did something wrong, but maybe you never did. She was just taken/not into you/gay/etc.

Every girl I've dated the past year has a smartphone w/FB/twit/IG/tumblr/snap. The 19-21 year olds have apps I don't even know about! They are still on them, but...You think they've given up fucking and multiple orgasms?
Given up on guys? C'mon, be real.

Others may disagree, but I find day game easier to break through the 'smartphone shield,' if only because she is totally not expecting it. Maybe our game just needs to be tighter. Maybe 'direct game' is harder now because they get uncomfortable and 'retreat' to their phone. Worth thinking about, anyway. We all know the 'net has made it both easier and harder for us.

[Ensam]

I'm constantly amazed at the wealth of 'PUA' knowledge that you can find in old and ancient texts. Women haven't changed in 4000 years, I doubt they've changed that much in the last 10. The environment changes but the motivations and needs remain the same. It's up to men (who want to get laid) to adapt and carry on.

[josephkay]

Here's my favorite post on pick-up from the old days, Tyler Durden's (RSD) 25 points. It's worth rereading every once in a while. My thoughts on the old PUA scene are below.

Quote:

Tyler says: This is some of the main shit I focus on fixing when I'm in the field. Almost EVERYONE I met so far screws up this shit, and it totally fucks up their sarges.

Source: fastseduction.com post by Tyler

Taught a few hundred guys by now just from meeting guys through PAIR and in workshops recently, and this is the shit that ups their game instantly with no tactics or anything. I see this shit ALL THE TIME. It's the BIGGEST and most COMMON problem I see after everyone I've met. This is some of the main shit I focus on fixing when I'm in the field.

Almost EVERYONE I met so far screws up this shit, and it totally fucks up their sarges.

If you do this, don't feel bad. 99% of guys I meet do it to various extents (myself included).

This is the extension of the "10 alpha qualities" post, which was when I was first figuring out what this shit meant. Back then, I was just posting observations. This post contains conclusions, having now thought about it.

ERADICATE this shit, and your game will go up B-I-G-T-I-M-E, more than ANY tactics will help you. This is part of what's called being a "natural". Even with nothing else, if you know this stuff you'll do well socially, and probably get laid. This stuff is the KEY.

This stuff is only for people who play the REAL game, not the INTERNET ARMCHAIR GAME. So guys who don't actually PLAY can skip this, because there's not much theory in it - its directly applicable.

1) FIDGETY MOVEMENTS AND TIGHT SHOULDERS AND TAKING YOURSELF TOO SERIOUSLY OR BEING TOO BUSINESSLIKE OR "SOPHISTICATED" (not laughing or being relaxed) = very visible subconsious (or conscious) self-doubt, overcompensating through non-relaxed state, where you're prepared to deal with anything that could happen. Ever met someone who doesn't blink when you talk to them?


2) TALKING TOO FAST = worried that people will stop listening to you unless you get out something that will interest them before they leave


3) LAUGHING AT YOUR OWN JOKES = covering up that you aren't affected that others didn't laugh, and social nervousness


4) SAYING "RIGHT" OR "YOU KNOW" AFTER STATEMENTS = seeking validation that what you said was true, or saying it because others aren't


5) STANDING WITH LEGS NOT HALF A METER APART AT LEAST = worried that you'll infringe on other people's personal space


6) TALKING TOO SOFTLY OR LOUD = fear that you'll impose yourself on people and their personal space(ie: beta).. alpha males aren't afraid to project their voice.. YET, talking obviously too LOUD can also be seen as OVERCOMPENSATING. Just like guys who wear GENERIC clothes are trying to fit in, or guys who wear OUTRAGEOUS clothes are trying too hard to overcompensate. (hint: be careful with peacocking, find a style that doesn't come off this way, which can be tricky but is still very doable).. Some guys don't talk, some talk too much, etc etc.. Find appropriate balance through trial and error, which is determined through social observation,


7) MOVING YOUR HANDS AROUND WHILE YOU TALK = trying to keep the attention of the group (sometimes can be cool, but most often a form of qualifying yourself)


8) LEANING IN *or* 'PECKING' = too eager to talk.. NEVER lean in no matter how loud the environment is MAKE HER LEAN IN or just leave but NEVER lean in or "peck" as its also called.


9) FACING BODY/FEET TOWARDS HER BEFORE SHE EARNED IT = trying to gain rapport with her too eagerly.


10) CHASING WHEN SHE WALKS AWAY = hoping she'll listen. If a chick moves away from you, move your bodylanguage MORE away from her, so she'll be drawn back.. don't CHASE her... WTF?!@?!?


11) NOT WITHDRAWING (backturns, etc) WHEN SHE DOES SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULDN'T TOLERATE FROM AN UGLY GIRL OR A GUY = trying too hard to pick her up


12) ANSWERING QUESTIONS TOO QUICKLY/EARLY = too much interest in the conversation


13) TURNING YOUR HEAD (OR "SNAPPING") WHEN YOU'RE ADDRESSED = too eager to be in convo.. so if your head is facing the other direction, and a girl says something to you, turn it SLOWLY to her, don't snap it out of eagerness to hear her


14) GOING BACK TO A PRIOR THREAD THAT WAS INTERUPTED AT THE FIRST CHANCE/BREAK-IN-CONVO THAT YOU GET = trying too hard to impress them.. (ie: when a thread gets broken off in the convo, and you go back to it FIRST chance you get when the other topic ends, you look like you were WAITING to get back to it.. WHY are you so eager to get back on it, unless you don't feel comfortable around the person and you need to qualify yourself to them?) WAIT until THEY say "what was that you were saying before?", and THEN go back to it.. if it doesn't happen, *DROP IT* even if it was good.


15) NOT APPEARING MORE INTO YOUR WINGMAN THEN THE CHICK = trying too hard to pick her up.. you've known your wingman longer than her.. why do you pay more attention to her than your wing???


16) TOO EAGER TO PAY ATTENTION - SAYING "what?" IF YOU CAN'T HEAR HER, PRIOR TO BEING IN RAPPORT = too much interest in what she's saying.. if she mumbles, just STACK OPENERS into an entirely DIFFERENT topic, RATHER than saying "what?" This is fucking KEY KEY KEY. If you say "what?" you'll lose her unless you're already past attraction and into rapport. If this happens, just run a new opener and change the topic. 1- you don't look too eager, 2- you look alpha for being disinterested in what she's talking about which helps anyway


17) REPLYING WITH OVERLY THOUGHT-OUT OF LOGICAL ANSWERS OR WITH OVERLY CLEAR/FORMAL PRONUNCIATION = being concerned that you won't be accepted unless you convince really well (eg. HB: why did you ask me that... RIGHT = I'm talking. (sit and stare) WRONG = because I really need to know since I've been thinking about this for a while.. the FIRST one conveys that you won't qualify yourself to her)


18) TAKING TOO MANY SENTENCES TO STATE AN IDEA THAT COULD BE STATED IN LESS SPACE = qualifying yourself. Commander Zap emails me a few months ago: "Remember TD, don't write what you can say, don't say what you can wink, don't wink what you can smile" TIGHT. The shorter you can explain something in, the more PROFOUND you'll appear. Why? You're not qualifying yourself. (ironically I'm massively guilty of this, due to the fact that I post when I'm really tired - see #21 to spot what was wrong with this last sentence)


19) BEING BOLD INSTEAD OF CONFIDENT = that you know that you can't pick her up, so you compensate with self-defeating actions so that the snub can be on "your terms". Saying "I'm sexy right?" or "baby I want some of that" or even just approaching when the logistics are totally unrealistic is too eager, because a CONFIDENT person wouldn't feel the NEED to say these kinds of things.. these things are symptoms of OVERCOMPENSATION for INSECURITIES.. which leads to..........


20) OVERCOMPENSATING INSECURITIES = fear of not being accepted. Have you ever met a janitor who the first thing he says is "money is over-rated.. I would never get caught up in the corporate world" blah blah.. if they'd have just said "I'm a janitor" and LEFT IT AT THAT we wouldn't have even THOUGHT that anything was wrong with it.. but because they INSTANTLY start overcompensating, it comes off as overcompensating or qualifying. Same with if they BRING IT UP TOO EARLY. Like "hey, I'm Steve.. I'm a janitor and I love it".. They're TRYING to be cocky but it comes off as COMPENSATING. BE COMFORTABLE WITH YOURSELF. If you're BALD, don't say "would you love a bald man?" as a pickup line. It's not COCKY.... its BOLD. If you're bad looking, don't say "don't you think I'm sexy". Just be comfortable with yourself, and don't bring up the issue at all.


21) OVERCOMPENSATING FAILURE OR SHORTCOMINGS = fear of being judged.. if you do poorly on a presentation, or on a sarge in front of a wingman, or on a test, DO NOT SAY DUMB SHIT LIKE "I'm really tired". EVEN IF you're ACTUALLY really tired, the mere act of saying "I'm tired" comes off as QUALIFYING yourself to the person. Just don't bring it up. If you have shitty clothes on, don't say "I have nicer clothes at home." Just don't bring it up. If you meet a girl when you're dressed bad, don't say "I have the coolest club clothes at home" Just don't bring it up.


22) GOING BACKWARDS IN THE PICKUP ON HER SCHEDULE = too eager to lay her.. if you've already GONE THROUGH the whole "let's ballbust and shit test eachother" attraction phase of the pickup, and you're now in RAPPORT -> if she tries to ballbust you at this point then just WITHDRAW ATTENTION. DO NOT BALLBUST BACK. It seems COUNTER INTUITIVE, but once you've gone through that whole little attract phase, and you're now being nice to eachother in rapport, DO NOT let her rewind the sarge by answering her ballbusting with ballbusts of your own. Just withdraw attention, to show that you're not interested in going BACKWARDS in a sarge.


23) WAITING FOR HER IF SHE LEAVES FOR ANY REASON (LIKE SAYS "I'M GOING TO THE WASHROOM, WAIT HERE) = too eager and into the convo.. if she goes to the washroom, make sure you're into another set by the time she gets back.

24) OVERLY REMEMBERING DETAILS ABOUT PAST CONVOS = convo means too much to you, because the person has unusual value to you (ie: a hot chick). Of course, I'm not advocating to be a total dick, but the general rule of thumb is that if you wouldn't have remembered a FAT CHICK or a GUY saying it, then don't remember the HB9 chick saying it. If some random dude said it and you would have remembered, then FINE. If you were in an unusually intimate convo that's also fine. But otherwise FAKE forgetting, even if she's a model and you remember every word. Even forget her name. If you see a random chick from your class or work, but you never talked to her, OPEN LIKE YOU DON'T KNOW HER. Don't give into the temptation to say "we work together". Just open like a random chick, and maybe if you get snubbed then pull out that card to save face, but only as a LAST RESORT.


25) OFFERING TOO MUCH ABOUT YOURSELF TOO *EARLY* = too eager to make them like you.. subcategories of this are:

A) Verbally: if you say to a chick "yeah, I just got back from NYC (or any cool place that would impress)" or "yeah, I just got my Rolex fixed", or "yeah, my stripper ex-girlfriend told me..." then she PICKS UP on the fact that you're trying too hard to impress her.. Same with NAME DROPPING.. DON'T GIVE GIRLS YOUR RESUME TOO EARLY.. Personality conveying routines should convey personality COVERTLY, so it looks like the story is just SO COOL that its WORTH TELLING on its own accord, and it just HAPPENS to have some good things about you in it. When offering good things about yourself, don't offer boring details. Say it with less detail, and it seems less eager. INSINUATE THAT WHICH YOU ARE TEMPTED TO ELICIDATE (holy shit, I just made up that last catchy sentence, but I've gotta say that I'm the shit.. right?)

B) Entertaining: If you have stuff like patterns, or the CUBE, or magic, or photos, or palmreading, and you do this EARLY, it comes off as TRY-HARD. Personally I don't use any of these things, but alot of guys do, and when they bust them out prior to the chick EARNING it, it comes off TRY-HARD. Use the stuff LATER, but not right away.

*****C) Wanting rapport with someone who didn't earn it: WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT??? I swear to god, almost *EVERY* PUA I meet live in field does this shit, and its SUPER LAME. Going up to a chick and saying "nice necklace" or "what's your name" or "where did you get that?" is FUCKING DORK SUPER LAME. WHY THE FUCK DO YOU CARE ABOUT THIS STUFF FROM A R-A-N-D-O-M PERSON????? The counter argument to this is that you're not hiding your desires blah blah blah she's a hot girl and she should be happy that you're approaching, but this is INTERNET RHETORIC.. and this approach is STILL hiding your desires behind the GUISE that you're nice, so even if the rhetoric was true, it would STILL be ineffective... In the INTERNET ARMCHAIR GAME this stuff is FINE, but in the REAL FIELD GAME this shit screws you over before you've even started gaming. It's fucking bullshit, and NOBODY who isn't very goodlooking or socially proofed (or whatever high value) PRIOR to going in, can make this kind of approach work consistently on HB8.5+ chicks. TRYING FOR RAPPORT TOO EARLY IS QUALIFYING YOURSELF TO HER BECAUSE SHE HAS NOT EARNED IT.

D) Talking without feedback: When you're talking to someone, and they don't give feedback, and you're talking and talking, you BETA YOURSELF. It's a DOWNWARD SPIRAL, where you start talking TOO MUCH, and you SENSE that you're qualifying yourself, so you overcompensate EVEN MORE by TALKING and TALKING more and more.. Then you feel more and more beta'ed because you qualified yourself, and you're left treading water, grabbing at ANYTHING that will impress the person, so you keep talking in hopes of saying that one thing that will impress them. AVOID this by not talking too much unless THEY give some feedback. IN THE FIELD you do this by PAUSING and FORCING them to fill in the awkward gaps.

Anyway, I got my start in the PUA scene of 10 years ago right before _The Game_ came out. There's lots of valuable information out there. The focus of PUA changed rapidly even then, but it didn't have to do so much with the material as guys' interpretation of it or their own lack of skills.

Before Mystery Method, guys were set on doing Double Your Dating number farming. And they realized it led to a lot of deadwood numbers and that they had to build some sort of connection. And then came Mystery's 9 step model. But the common mistake then was that guys would keep running attraction game (teasing, goofy routines) even when girls started asking them personal questions. It wasn't so much that Mystery didn't say that you shouldn't try to create rapport as the guys not seeing that the girls were looking for rapport.

The focus on MM was replaced by guys started getting into "natural game" with weird inner-game self-cheerleading exercises. Still, lots of guys would field-test material before trying it, so much of the old material was probably never used by strong players in any great numbers.

In the past ten years, I see not just the smart-phone revolution, the recession hurting night-game, and the ascendancy of social media, but also the importance of self-improvement. Guys eventually started realizing that being in good shape and having a lot going on is more important than having a canned response for any questions a girl might ask you. And from that, it's really a small step to look at a lot of girls (since their lives were on display on FB) and realize that they're not the type of people you want in your life.

[The Reactionary Tree]

(08-14-2014 11:59 PM)Frank Wrote:  

Anyone read or re-read the Mystery Method recently?

I considered it, but got turned off as I discovered the 'sphere, and read a bunch of Heartiste instead. I will likely pick it up this week. Or at least a seminar on YouTube or something.

I am actually reading it at the moment. It is pretty interesting. There is some good information in there. You can tell a lot of the MM is geared towards Mystery himself. He often use a disqualifier such as saying he was gay (and that's pretty gay).... or he would use an IOD in a push-pull fashion by saying something like, "OMG I cant even talk to you right now." Those are just the worst examples, he lists a lot of better responses. Obviously, you can use more masculine responses instead of the canned responses he cites in the book.

Ultimately, game is very personal and your game should be congruent to you. Myself as an example, I would describe myself as pretty low energy. So Mystery's Method is probably not the best for me (also MM is definitely more geared towards night game which I dont do anymore bc I am older). Instead something similar to what Roosh or Krauser do would be more appropriate since they are more laid back and low energy like myself.

I would recommend it as a read. You can compare and contrast it to something like Roosh's Bang. Ultimately, a lot of the advice is similar: dont be a thirsty beta.

[Krauser]

Mystery Method is an excellent book and every single player should read it. It's far better than all but the elite modern seduction literature. Make sure you concentrate on the principles and structure rather than the specific examples. The furry hats and "who lies more" are just trite examples and in no way undermine the core system.

It's no longer cutting edge but it's a fantastic theoretical foundation.

[The Reactionary Tree]

(08-19-2014 06:17 PM)Krauser Wrote:  

Mystery Method is an excellent book and every single player should read it. It's far better than all but the elite modern seduction literature. Make sure you concentrate on the principles and structure rather than the specific examples. The furry hats and "who lies more" are just trite examples and in no way undermine the core system.

It's no longer cutting edge but it's a fantastic theoretical foundation.

I've been reading through you blog in chronological order from the beginning (still in year 1) and I know you read and utilized the Mystery Method in some night sets.

Did any other books influence you in your journey to becoming one of the premier PUAs? Also, what are some of the elite modern seduction literature you recommend? I know you read Rational Male and Heartiste a lot.

[RockHard]

(08-19-2014 06:24 PM)objectivist tree Wrote:  

(08-19-2014 06:17 PM)Krauser Wrote:  

Mystery Method is an excellent book and every single player should read it. It's far better than all but the elite modern seduction literature. Make sure you concentrate on the principles and structure rather than the specific examples. The furry hats and "who lies more" are just trite examples and in no way undermine the core system.

It's no longer cutting edge but it's a fantastic theoretical foundation.

I've been reading through you blog in chronological order from the beginning (still in year 1) and I know you read and utilized the Mystery Method in some night sets.

Did any other books influence you in your journey to becoming one of the premier PUAs? Also, what are some of the elite modern seduction literature you recommend? I know you read Rational Male and Heartiste a lot.

Likewise, Krauser, I know you mentioned Ross Jeffries a couple times in the past. Do you still use his stuff? Do you use any patterning stuff?