He stated he was an investment banker...OK..well I think we all know that is a job that pays ££££...throwing that into a pick up conversation,. because she is gonna ask you what you do for a living...its going to certainly swing the odds in your favor.
Only a small proportion of people in investment banking make the big bucks. Most of those guys were educated at elite universities and are extremely well-connected and intelligent. In Manhattan, every third Joe works in I-banking and most of them are making decent but not fantastic coin.
Especially as he also stated his ex wife was a "model"
now if he married a model for 9 years, and didn't learn game until after his divorce..then how did he marry a model....???? The only explanation is he was making bank..thats what attracted his wife ..if everything he says is legit... Seems a little odd he would leave a high paying career to purse the pick up business as well...but who knows...ill take his word for it.
Every half decent looking girl is a "model" these days. I know and I've dated a bunch of so-called models. That really doesn't mean a whole lot this day and age. He never claimed she was a supermodel or anything. But there's a difference between getting a few pictures in the Macy's catalog and being on the cover of Sports Illustrated Swim Suit Edition, ya know?
Also I have done day approaches, from time to time, and i have had day lays in the past, from a few cold hits, but nothing like the one he does when showing how its done...If I literally pounced on a woman "from behind"...I cant see that being a good idea or going well at all..my gut instinct says this would scare the 5h17 out of a woman....Ill take his word for it though...but i wont be trying it anytime soon.
He did state quite clearly that less than half of those approaches even go anywhere. And even of those that do go somewhere, most of them don't end up in lays. It's not that hard to believe that 1 or 2 out of 10 approaches could result in a lay.
not mad about his flat cap persona either..but if it works for him..again fine...my gut instinct again says anything that covers your head...is a bad idea...especially if it has a peak shading your eyes...makes you literally look like a 5hady cvn7...but again if it works for him...The funny thing is the two guys he is schooling, look in good shape..and were far better presented, just dressed in jeans and tee's...if this style of cold approach really works..those two guys should have number closed...so im am very, very, very skeptical.
I hate the flat cap look too, but I know a guy who rocks one and he regularly pulls primo pvssy. Apparently some girls like that look. I see plenty of hipster dudes here in Brooklyn rocking those flat caps and some of them are with some fine looking girls.
Just because those hosts are dressed better or better looking (debatable in the case of one of them) doesn't mean that they know how to talk to women. The American/Canadian guy seemed to have almost no confidence in his body language. It takes a while to calibrate your interactions.
but jumping in front of women on the street...i cant see that working out...i wont be trying that 5h17 anytime soon anyhow.
Seems like this is an argument from personal incredulity. You wouldn't know if it works or not if you've never tried it.
In my experience- and many here will agree- day game often has a higher success rate than night game. Girls don't have their b1tch shields up and there's less competition. They are in a completely different state of mind, which often makes them softer targets and less likely to flake.
Also he rants about feminism..i dont agree with that stuff...in my book..feminism, is about equality...i dont think there is any need to slag off women who are not so attractive or older or whatever...and blame them for feminism...women deserved to be treated more equal..no question...have things gone too far...id say yes..
Nowhere did he bash women's equality. What he bashed was feminists' push for higher alimony payments, trying to get them favorable treatment over men, more welfare for single mothers etc. I think those are reasonable points to make.
but then again if women wanna ho around until they meet mr sucker..then i really cant blame them..its their lives to live or ruin or whatever...the old model of marrying the virgin and having a couple of kids is dead an buried and hell..it wasn't all that good a model anyhow..(most marriages were never happy, well not after the first few years) the problem isn't feminism..the problem is men...men who have been educated to elevate sex above all other pursuits.. I know we are physically wired to get a hardon every time we lay eyes on a cute woman..but come...we only have ourselves to blame for much of the state of the dynamics between us and women.
He would agree completely with this statement. He said quite clearly that the current structure, which favors the female imperative is beneficial to Alpha males. This is as opposed to the old system which guaranteed most men a mate.
