[Cr33pin]

nice shoes, wanna fuck

[Giovonny]

Over the past few years I have done hundreds of direct approaches and hundreds of indirect approaches. I can't say one is any better then the other. They both can work and they both can fail. There are times I went direct when I probably should have gone indirect, and there are times when I went indirect when I probably should have went direct. Its hard to predict how a girl will react in any situation. Use the method that you are most comfortable with.

Like Samseau and Roosh have said, the opener is a very small part of the entire interaction. What you say after the opener and how you present yourself after the opener are just as important if not more so. The opener is just to get the conversation started, once that happens, you still have to maintain the conversation successfully and of course close the conversation with the girl wanting to see you again. As always, vibe, body language, and conversational skills are key. You can have the greatest opener in the world, direct or indirect, but if you can't keep that conversation flowing smoothly and attractively, the opener doesn't really matter.

Guys should practice using both methods, after a few hundred practice approaches, you can start to develop a "sense" for when to go indirect vs when to go direct. Sometimes the situation and circumstances are better for one style vs. the other. Sometimes, You can just tell by looking at a girl, which style she will respond better to. Sometimes, I just feel like being real ballsy and direct. Other times, I feel like going indirect. We all should have both in our arsenal.

Direct requires and strong, masculine vibe with unapologetic body language. This is a great way to improve your male, sexual presence. If she senses any weakness or self doubt, she might not respect your directness. Direct is a great training tool to build confidence and presence.

Indirect is more about conversational skills. Can you smoothly transition from a harmless conversation to a conversation that gets her interested in knowing more about you. Indirect is great for improving your verbal skills.

I like direct because its more fun and entertaining for me.

I sometimes use a "hybrid" approach which is were I use "indirect language" but "direct body language" at the exact same time. I will not tell the girl that I'm attracted to her but I will look at her and talk to her in a tone that is very suggestive/sexual. I will just talk to her about any random topic but while doing that, I will look at her in the eyes seductively and move my eyes around her body.

You can say almost anything and make it seductive. For example, "Damn, its so hot today, I'm gonna get some ice cream"

As I say "Damn", I'm looking at her waist. Then I slowly move my eyes up her body and slowly say, "its so hot today", then look her in the eyes without any fear or embarrassment..."I'm gonna get some ice cream"...as I move my eyes back down over her body. Of course I keep a little grin on my face and say everything with a playful but strong tone. Tonality is very important with this type of approach. The way you talk and your body/eye language is almost more important then what you say.

[Chad Daring]

Alright, I'm not taking sides, so just ease off the quote button.

I see where Samseau is coming from, his original (I'm not even sure where the debate is at now lol) argument wasn't that one way works better then the other, it was that he's moved BEYOND consideration.

Ice, you go out and see a girl and you might ask yourself "should I open her directly, or indirectly?" Samseau looks at the same girl and might ask "should I talk to her or not?" Its ostensibly the same question, but the methodology is different. You're approaching the situation as a task to be handled, he's just approaching the situation.

I only bring this up because I've made the jump from one side of the fence to the other in the last couple months or so. When I first got involved with this community and read Bang I was in a very technical mindset. I would dissect social situations and apply Game rhetoric wherever it applied. Now, for the most part, I just exist in the social situation and things just happen.

Now you're gonna say "but wait, you were talking about direct/indirect earlier!"

Thats only because "direct openers" are alien to me, so I have to step back over the fence to the analytical view. Thats not natural for me, my natural state is just to BE and let what happens happen. I'm not "opening" I'm conversating. Its the same thing from a third person view, but to me personally its different because of the type and amount of thought that goes into it.

[dulst]

I think the idea of saying "you're the cutest girl in the bar" would be a great way to get over initial approach anxiety. ie Not being intimidated by hot girls and saying something potentially very embarrassing.

I over use social circle game due to approach anxiety, and so will be trying this before I run out of friends to fuck.

EDIT: Would probably sub "cutest" for "best looking" though, given my accent and style.

[mofo]

That's interesting.

[dulst]

(12-21-2011 06:23 PM)mofo Wrote:  

(12-21-2011 05:41 PM)dulst Wrote:  

I think the idea of saying "you're the cutest girl in the bar" would be a great way to get over initial approach anxiety. ie Not being intimidated by hot girls and saying something potentially very embarrassing.

I over use social circle game due to approach anxiety, and so will be trying this before I run out of friends to fuck.

EDIT: Would probably sub "cutest" for "best looking" though, given my accent and style.

You are the cutest girl in the club opener is not embarrassing. WTF?
The whole idea of something being embarrassing is girlish.

More likely to be laughed at than "hi"/higher probability of a rude rejection.

Would help you get over the fear of the sort of "worst case scenario" rejections.

[Riker]

I want to do this in day game with an audience. Whenever someone else can hear me I always pussy out from doing direct game. Fuck that, who cares if they hear you and you get rejected right?

[Iceinthewater]

(12-20-2011 11:59 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Reading comprehension for the clueless:

Quote:

Wasn't one model - I said that the unanimous response from hot girls - the ones I actually go for - don't get approached like guys would think they do. I don't need to brag lmao...work on your reading comprehension.

You said:

Quote:

I realized this when I approached a woman who is a well-known model, and she said was "I never get approached like that. Guys usually just stare."

This is the unanimous experience of women I've met and dated. They get stares and weird excuses to talk (indirect done the WRONG WAY). They don't get genuine, warm direct approaches, OR fun witty indirect approaches.

I originally said:

Quote:

Giving a girl a complement is probably the least interesting thing you could say to most girls, who have been told they are pretty over 10,000 times before she's hit 18. That's why I think direct is bullshit.

Do you see how what you said has almost nothing to do with what I've said?

Your response, that guys usually don't direct approaches has nothing to do with whether or not direct approaches are interesting. Being direct may be unique, but it doesn't make it interesting.

It's also great if you find those 3% of girls who find direct game charming or interesting or whatever. But most girls aren't going to give two shits because hot girls get complimented daily by almost everyone they know.

Talking about models, and the hot women you've dated to prove a point... irrelevant!

You said:

Quote:

You knew what you were saying about direct being bullshit because later you said that direct lacks social grace. you weren't saying "it doesn't matter" - it's out there for everyone to read lol.

I said:

Quote:

Openers don't matter except as a way to segue into conversation. Giving a girl a complement is probably the least interesting thing you could say to most girls, who have been told they are pretty over 10,000 times before she's hit 18. That's why I think direct is bullshit. But even still, just open by saying whatever you feel like saying.

Notice my position isn't that direct openers don't work. My position, because you seem unable to grasp logic (unlike Tuthmosis who has been talking to me on the same wavelength), is that the opener doesn't matter. Indirect/Direct is a bunch of shit. Do you understand now?

Quote:

And if I told you dancefloor game is bullshit and justified my point, does that mean it doesn't work for you? Nice try backtracking.

It depends on the point you made! Maybe you're point is that dance floor game is that dancing doesn't matter, and that women are attracted to me for some other reason.

Quote:

I'll ask you once again, have you EVER tried to approach a girl directly.

Yeah dude, I've gone direct... I've stated that I have above.

Yea man I think we are both men with strong personalities and opinions. Maybe I read too much into your initial post. Honestly wasn't trying to brag - I was just saying that guys assume 10s get approached a lot, but the reality ACCORDING to a chick that most guys would call a 10 actually told me the opposite.

anyways, my approach with her was actually pretty shaky. I was a lot younger and super nervous cus she was so hot. She turned out to be really nice so that made it easier.

btw I really did like your dancefloor post - that's always been a weak area for me.

[Iceinthewater]

(12-20-2011 09:14 PM)Chad Daring Wrote:  

Alright, I'm not taking sides, so just ease off the quote button.

I see where Samseau is coming from, his original (I'm not even sure where the debate is at now lol) argument wasn't that one way works better then the other, it was that he's moved BEYOND consideration.

Ice, you go out and see a girl and you might ask yourself "should I open her directly, or indirectly?" Samseau looks at the same girl and might ask "should I talk to her or not?" Its ostensibly the same question, but the methodology is different. You're approaching the situation as a task to be handled, he's just approaching the situation.

I only bring this up because I've made the jump from one side of the fence to the other in the last couple months or so. When I first got involved with this community and read Bang I was in a very technical mindset. I would dissect social situations and apply Game rhetoric wherever it applied. Now, for the most part, I just exist in the social situation and things just happen.

Now you're gonna say "but wait, you were talking about direct/indirect earlier!"

Thats only because "direct openers" are alien to me, so I have to step back over the fence to the analytical view. Thats not natural for me, my natural state is just to BE and let what happens happen. I'm not "opening" I'm conversating. Its the same thing from a third person view, but to me personally its different because of the type and amount of thought that goes into it.

For sure - I didn't want to come off like I was taking a side either. If you can approach by farting on a girl and that works then fuckin do it! lol

I get what Samseaus saying. I think that's a natural mindset that comes with experience, but in the beginning, trying out different things is good, which is what Batata is doing, and a bunch of people were like "oh that wouldn't work," even though he said that it IS working.

I think that a good reason to try direct when getting started is it makes you grow a huge pair of balls, AND gets you comfortable showing sexuality right away - Giovanny talked about this in his reply also, and I agree it requires a very solid masculine core, and playful vibe as well.

The main thing that makes an approach work is that YOU are having fun. That's the only rule IMO.

I would say I personally do direct ("You are fuckin beautiful. What's your name?") about 50% and the other 50% I do something more situational, or more coy, but still showing that I'm attracted to her.

But there's always that sexual vibe - eye contact, open body, smile, maybe a light touch - no matter what. I really like to set a sexual precedence early on, so we are on the right track. AND I like to know if the girl is totally unavailable so I don't waste my time.

[Iceinthewater]

(12-20-2011 04:00 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

I sometimes use a "hybrid" approach which is were I use "indirect language" but "direct body language" at the exact same time. I will not tell the girl that I'm attracted to her but I will look at her and talk to her in a tone that is very suggestive/sexual. I will just talk to her about any random topic but while doing that, I will look at her in the eyes seductively and move my eyes around her body.

You can say almost anything and make it seductive. For example, "Damn, its so hot today, I'm gonna get some ice cream"

As I say "Damn", I'm looking at her waist. Then I slowly move my eyes up her body and slowly say, "its so hot today", then look her in the eyes without any fear or embarrassment..."I'm gonna get some ice cream"...as I move my eyes back down over her body. Of course I keep a little grin on my face and say everything with a playful but strong tone. Tonality is very important with this type of approach. The way you talk and your body/eye language is almost more important then what you say.

Yea this is what I'm talking about. This is the money balance right here. Like I said, you gotta start somewhere, and I think a great way to begin cultivating this vibe is by going verbally direct for a while.

And hey, sometimes you only have like 30 seconds (subway platform, the street, etc) and you just need to cut to the chase and tell the girl she's beautiful and you want to call her.

[anewtypedude]

Indirect works best if you are average looking because you are trying to charm her with your personality, plus if you are not good looking a direct appoach makes you look like a creep.

Direct works best if you are good looking because chances are she is already hooked and she may lose interest the more time you spend talking about random shit.

Indirect works better at night and direct works better with day game due to the principle of scarcity. At night, she expects guys to hit on her so by going direct you just group yourself with the average Joes. But during day game, because she isn't expecting to get hit on, going direct shows her that you have the confidence.

To summarize:
Direct: good looking, day game
Indirect: average looking, night game

[iknowexactly]

IceInWater, in reference to going direct, is that your pic in posts?

If so "You look the most like Justin Timberlake out of all the guys in here" hahaahah

if that IS you:

That's A WASPY, YOUNG, middle/upper-middle class look that gets them mad status.

So going direct is going to be easier if you match their pre-existing pruh pruh pruh ogrammed template. zzzzllllllllooooeeee

I think a good synthesis here is to develop one's own optimal approach and see eek-oh-logogogogicalllyy why it werks.