I just deleted all my online dating apps

[DreamAgain]

The brunch, the dogs, the espresso martinis, the "let's make our first date a trip to ____".

This **** straight up put me into a depression, the lays weren't even worth it.

I can confidently say after swiping through thousands of women on these apps, I have yet to find one that is wife material. At best it was smash and dash. Maybe the problem is me, whatever.

I wish you guys success who are continuing to use it, I'll die by the sword of the in person variety.

When it was famine when my pictures were worse, for obvious reasons I felt bad.

When I improved my pictures and was feasting, I felt like I was playing a game where I already knew the button combinations to press on the controller to get the end outcome, because all the "characters" that appeared on my screen communicated the same way, and likewise behaved the same in person.

I'm in my early thirties, time is running out to find a quality woman to build a future with. Why not widen my net and use these applications one might ask, well, fishing in the mud for moby **** isn't going to work.

I even felt like a beta male using the apps honestly, like I was too incapable to go catch a fish out in the real world, here I am like a chump entertaining a girl who has 1000 guys like me in her inbox and could honestly care less. Approaching in person has been much more enjoyable for me anyway, I don't even mind getting rejected, the song and dance and thinking on your feet is fun.

Good luck to my brothers who are still in the online game.

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

 

[SW15]

I can confidently say after swiping through thousands of women on these apps, I have yet to find one that is wife material.

That's an important point. @BPH has said that using swipe apps to find longer term girlfriends who could possibly become wives is not a good use of time.

At best it was smash and dash.

the lays weren't even worth it.

You are thinking like a top tier guy would think. A top tier guy has the opportunity to do a lot of smash and dash. Many do.

Some top tier guys will end up in a longer term relationship with a top tier woman.

I even felt like a beta male using the apps honestly, like I was too incapable to go catch a fish out in the real world, here I am like a chump entertaining a girl who has 1000 guys like me in her inbox and could honestly care less.

I don't know why you would feel like a beta doing that.

Many alphas have discovered great efficiencies in swipe apps as compared to night game. Alphas of the 2010s-2020s can get laid more efficiently than alpha tier 1980s-1990s men who didn't have that option.

 

[DreamAgain]

That's an important point. @BPH has said that using swipe apps to find longer term girlfriends who could possibly become wives is not a good use of time.



You are thinking like a top tier guy would think. A top tier guy has the opportunity to do a lot of smash and dash. Many do.

Some top tier guys will end up in a longer term relationship with a top tier woman.



I don't know why you would feel like a beta doing that.

Many alphas have discovered great efficiencies in swipe apps as compared to night game. Alphas of the 2010s-2020s can get laid more efficiently than alpha tier 1980s-1990s men who didn't have that option.

I can't quite articulate why I do, I guess there is something about in person body language, nuance of expression, the physical aspect of commanding a woman's attention where there is only you and her in the exchange, that makes it much more enjoyable for me.

Also, frankly, many of the girls on the apps just lie about their appearance. Seeing everything in person saves a lot of time of wasting time and money on dates where you were baited and switched.

Some of these women do not compromise on less than dinner for dates as well, or several rounds of drinks where you will easily be spending $150 a date. For some here this is pocket change perhaps, but it does add up if your match queue is pretty high.

Now, could you insist on a walk and coffee, yeah I did this sometimes, but eventually to hook up with the hotter women at least 1 dinner was necessary.

With bar approach same night lays were very much possible where I didn't have to spend a dime on her, maybe at most buying 1 drink.

 

[BPH]

Some of these women do not compromise on less than dinner for dates as well, or several rounds of drinks where you will easily be spending $150 a date. For some here this is pocket change perhaps, but it does add up if your match queue is pretty high.

Then don't entertain those women.

Most of my dates are just grabbing a drink at the bar and seeing how the night goes.

Though I do agree with @SW15 that you shouldn't be looking for a wife on Tinder.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

The basic bvtch dime a dozen NPC clones is definitely depressing. Fvcking these women gives me zero pleasure.

 

[DreamAgain]

The basic bvtch dime a dozen NPC clones is definitely depressing. Fvcking these women gives me zero pleasure.

Have you found a solution to this dilemma, please share.

 

[DreamAgain]

Then don't entertain those women.

Most of my dates are just grabbing a drink at the bar and seeing how the night goes.

Though I do agree with @SW15 that you shouldn't be looking for a wife on Tinder.

I do that too, but when ****tails cost $20 minimum, add 18% gratuity build in, you're looking at $100 + parking/gas/uber whatever easily a date.

 

[SW15]

when ****tails cost $20 minimum, add 18% gratuity build in, you're looking at $100 + parking/gas/uber whatever easily a date.

In the late 1990s, Tom Leykis created Leykis 101, a set of rules around navigating the mating marketplace. One of the rules was keeping a maximum of $40 per date. If you were to adjust for inflation, that's around $70-$75 today. I think it is possible to keep costs under $70 per date.

I don't know where drinks in bars are costing $20 minimum. That's insane! However, a lot of places are having drinks that are $10-$15 per drink. With good planning, it's possible to reduce that cost if selecting a venue that's running drinks specials on a specific night.

A lot of the good date bars in my city have difficult parking associated with them. It's not easy to park a car near the good dates. Parking is a logistical challenge in many cases. Sometimes it is easier to get an Uber/Lyft to go to a date.

When I first moved to my current city in the early 2010s, I was staying under the Leykis $40 rule then. That was impressive for that era.

Dates now don't need to cost $70-$100. Keeping them as inexpensive as possible is a good idea. I think there's a tendency for men to play it as a numbers game (which is a bad idea) and too many arrange too many dates that shouldn't be arranged. There's a lot of poor screening that happens. Most of this happens from tech-based dating (swipe apps & DMs) rather than in-person approaching. One of the consequences of online dating is that too many men are arranging too many dates that shouldn't be arranged. It's very difficult to select dates from behind an electronic screen primarily. Phone conversations too are poor predictors of real life chemistry. The best way to arrange first dates that will result in second dates is using a real life method.

Men need to re-focus and arrange fewer but better screened dates that would lead to more successful outcomes.

 

[DreamAgain]

In the late 1990s, Tom Leykis created Leykis 101, a set of rules around navigating the mating marketplace. One of the rules was keeping a maximum of $40 per date. If you were to adjust for inflation, that's around $70-$75 today. I think it is possible to keep costs under $70 per date.

I don't know where drinks in bars are costing $20 minimum. That's insane! However, a lot of places are having drinks that are $10-$15 per drink. With good planning, it's possible to reduce that cost if selecting a venue that's running drinks specials on a specific night.

A lot of the good date bars in my city have difficult parking associated with them. It's not easy to park a car near the good dates. Parking is a logistical challenge in many cases. Sometimes it is easier to get an Uber/Lyft to go to a date.

When I first moved to my current city in the early 2010s, I was staying under the Leykis $40 rule then. That was impressive for that era.

Dates now don't need to cost $70-$100. Keeping them as inexpensive as possible is a good idea. I think there's a tendency for men to play it as a numbers game (which is a bad idea) and too many arrange too many dates that shouldn't be arranged. There's a lot of poor screening that happens. Most of this happens from tech-based dating (swipe apps & DMs) rather than in-person approaching. One of the consequences of online dating is that too many men are arranging too many dates that shouldn't be arranged. It's very difficult to select dates from behind an electronic screen primarily. Phone conversations too are poor predictors of real life chemistry. The best way to arrange first dates that will result in second dates is using a real life method.

Men need to re-focus and arrange fewer but better screened dates that would lead to more successful outcomes.

Think NYC/Miami/LA/DC, $20 is par for the course, if not low.

Yes, screening could be better. The problem is, if you don't quickly get some of these women off the apps and into the real world domain, you will be lost in the tidal wive of likes/matches.

They simply do not have the attention spans to juggle so many conversations at once. I mean, could you? Actually even more than 3 conversations at a time I found it to be laborious and I was losing interest. I can only imagine having hundreds.

 

[SW15]

Think NYC/Miami/LA/DC, $20 is par for the course, if not low.

Although Dallas is a major city, it isn't quite there at $20 per drink.

Drinks dates aren't as much of a savings anymore over dinner dates in some of the more upscale lounges. That said, don't do dinner dates in restaurants prior to sex. Bad idea. Drinks dates used to represent more of a cost savings than they do now.

if you don't quickly get some of these women off the apps and into the real world domain, you will be lost in the tidal wive of likes/matches.

That's why it is better to start interactions in the real world.

They simply do not have the attention spans to juggle so many conversations at once. Actually even more than 3 conversations at a time I found it to be laborious and I was losing interest. I can only imagine having hundreds.

You have a good point on attention spans.

I have an idea that a lot of the online dating culture is spilling over into the real world.

I think there's less of an approach culture in the real world because many women aren't into being approached in the real world based on their electronic volume.

A lot of women that a man could approach in the real world are juggling hundreds of conversations between their swipe apps and social media platforms. I don't think a lot of them are thinking about adding more men in real life because they have hundreds of options already in their smartphone. The cutie you see in the grocery store or at the park isn't necessarily open to meeting more men because she can sit at home in a t-shirt wearing no makeup and arrange more dates than if she spent 2-3 nights a week at various bars across town fielding real life approaches.

 

[Divorced w 3]

In the late 1990s, Tom Leykis created Leykis 101, a set of rules around navigating the mating marketplace. One of the rules was keeping a maximum of $40 per date. If you were to adjust for inflation, that's around $70-$75 today. I think it is possible to keep costs under $70 per date.

I don't know where drinks in bars are costing $20 minimum. That's insane! However, a lot of places are having drinks that are $10-$15 per drink. With good planning, it's possible to reduce that cost if selecting a venue that's running drinks specials on a specific night.

A lot of the good date bars in my city have difficult parking associated with them. It's not easy to park a car near the good dates. Parking is a logistical challenge in many cases. Sometimes it is easier to get an Uber/Lyft to go to a date.

When I first moved to my current city in the early 2010s, I was staying under the Leykis $40 rule then. That was impressive for that era.

Dates now don't need to cost $70-$100. Keeping them as inexpensive as possible is a good idea. I think there's a tendency for men to play it as a numbers game (which is a bad idea) and too many arrange too many dates that shouldn't be arranged. There's a lot of poor screening that happens. Most of this happens from tech-based dating (swipe apps & DMs) rather than in-person approaching. One of the consequences of online dating is that too many men are arranging too many dates that shouldn't be arranged. It's very difficult to select dates from behind an electronic screen primarily. Phone conversations too are poor predictors of real life chemistry. The best way to arrange first dates that will result in second dates is using a real life method.

Men need to re-focus and arrange fewer but better screened dates that would lead to more successful outcomes.

If you’re going to spend the evening at the bar, in my humble opinion, I’d rather be out with a friend spending that money on myself, and if I’m in the right place long enough, I’m taking someone home anyway. A lot cheaper when you’re not dealing with the hours of navigating your new date’s expectations and also maybe just drinking a red bull now and then yourself. I have gotten ONS with college girls laying maybe $30 out on $5 tips and not paying for the redbull or her drinks.

 

[Divorced w 3]

I have also had Tinder hookups that required zero financial outlay - I don’t do apps much but I’ve never not had an app result in sex.

 

[Captain Rizz]

Dating apps are pretty stacked against men, just demographically speaking: there are way more men than women on these apps, so there's tons of competition for every chick.

There are some tricks that help. One is buying things like boosts and super likes. These actually work to some extent (they make sure of it to keep your buying), but your profile needs to have a baseline level of attractiveness.

But a better use of money is probably using an AI dating assistant. AI is getting scary good. I've found that the AI coach Wingman Live is a very good way to boost to do better on Tinder (or an app).

I say that something like Wingman is a better use of money because it can impartially tell you exactly what's wrong with your pictures and how you can improve them. Example:



It also tells you how to respond to matches after you put their pics/profile in, because it does sentiment analysis and gives you openers. It's insanely good at finding details in a match's photos to provide you with good material to open with that will actually get a response. You can upload convos and get your next reply too.


It also gives you openers and replies based on your matches that you do get to optimize. Also it has a chatbot that's trained on game and is completely uncensored.

Anyway, the AI revolution is here and I people should take full advantage of it. Pair this AI stuff with game and super likes and I think you'll do much better. Good luck out there, man.

 

[BPH]

I do that too, but when ****tails cost $20 minimum, add 18% gratuity build in, you're looking at $100 + parking/gas/uber whatever easily a date.

You're going to have to do that anyway, so why are you upset specifically at the dating apps?

 

[Divorced w 3]

Dating apps are pretty stacked against men, just demographically speaking: there are way more men than women on these apps, so there's tons of competition for every chick.

There are some tricks that help. One is buying things like boosts and super likes. These actually work to some extent (they make sure of it to keep your buying), but your profile needs to have a baseline level of attractiveness.

But a better use of money is probably using an AI dating assistant. AI is getting scary good. I've found that the AI coach Wingman Live is a very good way to boost to do better on Tinder (or an app).

I say that something like Wingman is a better use of money because it can impartially tell you exactly what's wrong with your pictures and how you can improve them. Example:

View attachment 13814

It also tells you how to respond to matches after you put their pics/profile in, because it does sentiment analysis and gives you openers. It's insanely good at finding details in a match's photos to provide you with good material to open with that will actually get a response. You can upload convos and get your next reply too.

View attachment 13815
It also gives you openers and replies based on your matches that you do get to optimize. Also it has a chatbot that's trained on game and is completely uncensored.

Anyway, the AI revolution is here and I people should take full advantage of it. Pair this AI stuff with game and super likes and I think you'll do much better. Good luck out there, man.

That’s pretty cool

 

[CornbreadFed]

Take a break to refresh your mind op

 

[DreamAgain]

You're going to have to do that anyway, so why are you upset specifically at the dating apps?

A lot easier to prescreen when you meet someone in person, to decide if you want to invest in that next step.

 

[SW15]

Dating apps are pretty stacked against men, just demographically speaking: there are way more men than women on these apps, so there's tons of competition for every chick.

Bumble and Hinge are around 2 men for every woman. Tinder is close to 3 men for every woman.

It's going to be difficult for any man to stand out with those ratios.

That's a good reason why those formats strongly favor top tier men. Men in the 85th - 90th percentile do well on apps.

This is why there are reasonably cute girls in the 6 range riding the penis carousel with men 8.5+ and failing to get commitment, then complaining about how she's going to have to settle for a mid tier man on her level now that she's an aging 30 something.

a better use of money is probably using an AI dating assistant. AI is getting scary good. I've found that the AI coach Wingman Live is a very good way to boost to do better on Tinder (or an app).

It also tells you how to respond to matches after you put their pics/profile in, because it does sentiment analysis and gives you openers. It's insanely good at finding details in a match's photos to provide you with good material to open with that will actually get a response. You can upload convos and get your next reply too.

the AI revolution is here and I people should take full advantage of it. Pair this AI stuff with game and super likes and I think you'll do much better. Good luck out there, man.

Men's motivation to use AI on apps would be to stand out in a difficult environment, as I explained above. I can see why men would drawn to turning over their dating efforts to an AI assistant.

A lot easier to prescreen when you meet someone in person, to decide if you want to invest in that next step.

Prescreening in person takes more effort but can be more efficient and effective. There are numerous daygame and night game options.

 

[Gamisch]

That's an important point. @BPH has said that using swipe apps to find longer term girlfriends who could possibly become wives is not a good use of time.



You are thinking like a top tier guy would think. A top tier guy has the opportunity to do a lot of smash and dash. Many do.

Some top tier guys will end up in a longer term relationship with a top tier woman.



I don't know why you would feel like a beta doing that.

Many alphas have discovered great efficiencies in swipe apps as compared to night game. Alphas of the 2010s-2020s can get laid more efficiently than alpha tier 1980s-1990s men who didn't have that option.

You don't know why he feels beta ?

Because it IS . Swiping reduces an important component of seduction namely conquering a woman and creating a good story.

Its like playing the feminine game. Woman don't really care how you meet them, just like they don't care about their past or bodycount. But we men do.

So from that point of view your last paragraph is flawed. The least alpha way to meet woken is through dating apps. It's the exact opposite:it's the most passive and feminine way to meet women.

There's no way around the fact that she has countless carbon copies of you in her inbox. This ignites a completely different dynamic from meeting her organically.

 

[DreamAgain]

You don't know why he feels beta ?

Because it IS . Swiping reduces an important component of seduction namely conquering a woman and creating a good story.

Its like playing the feminine game. Woman don't really care how you meet them, just like they don't care about their past or bodycount. But we men do.

So from that point of view your last paragraph is flawed. The least alpha way to meet woken is through dating apps. It's the exact opposite:it's the most passive and feminine way to meet women.

There's no way around the fact that she has countless carbon copies of you in her inbox. This ignites a completely different dynamic from meeting her organically.

I 100% agree.