Who is best Day Game pickup artist?

[SW15]

The tiger woods neg let the pro PUA coach down on this occasion. Always next time (when he opens a girl who is attracted to him)

She's not at all receptive. Plenty of women are like that. This is a 56 second interaction for him. With me, I don't think I would have taken this interaction to even 30 seconds.

 

[characternote]

She's not at all receptive. Plenty of women are like that. This is a 56 second interaction for him. With me, I don't think I would have taken this interaction to even 30 seconds.

of course.

Problem is that PUA's think they can 'force' attraction in an unattracted girl without realising that it's a numbers game and when they pull a girl it's in spite of their negs and not because of them lol. (attracted and unattracted girls will react very differently from each other too a neg)

All of the best PUA's have hundreds and hundreds of interactions just like that (where's she's not into him and it's just him 'plowing' with his game for a while before the inevitable rejections)

I've always been able to tell within seconds of me approaching a girl whether it's gonna be a no or a yes, and can tell the same when I watch infields

Negging is no longer an effective tactic

it never was, tbh (file it under the same stuff as 'cold reads', 'pushpull lines', 'NLP embedded commands', 'DHV's
, 'self amusement' and other 'attraction material', 'strong frame' etc)

I saw oldschool poster 'Dbot' referenced earlier, but it seems to just be the same old stuff. (e.g when its on, it's on! he seems to be on the same wavelength as me)

''When I was done with the camera, I grabbed a pack of AA batteries to go with it, and met her back at the register. As she rang me up, the conversation went just like this:

Her: so did you get it open?
Me: yeah I figured it out, thanks. (pause) What's your name?
Her: Danielle.
Me: What time are you off, Danielle?
Her: 1.
(I flip my receipt over and write my name and number on it)
Me: My name is Dustin. I want you to call me as soon as you get out. Enjoy the rest of your shift.
Her: ok byee!

She called at 1, and met me at my place. We made out and fooled around for about 30 minutes before we finally got naked and ****ed wildly. She ended up leaving about 20 minutes ago, but was very enjoyable and energetic, so I got her number and will definitely hit her up again.

I do this particular pickup quite often, and it's very successful. Even the approach doesn't really change much (What's your name? When are you off? Here's my info. Call me). I can usually tell if she will end up ****ing me before I even say anything, because she'll usually get a little tense or nervous as I approach her. This is a good thing and a definite green light. Also, when I ask for her name, I switch from the "I'm just a normal customer" tone to the "hey you're lookin sexy" tone. You know you're doing it right if she has a shocked but excited look on her face You'll figure it out.

Have fun!

-Dbot ''

 

[SW15]

Negging is no longer an effective tactic. Additionally, negging was a tactic typically used in nightlife venue approaching. I don't think negging was strongly recommended as a daygame tactic ever.

it never was, tbh (file it under the same stuff as 'cold reads', 'pushpull lines', 'NLP embedded commands', 'DHV's
, 'self amusement' and other 'attraction material', 'strong frame' etc)

I saw oldschool poster 'Dbot' referenced earlier, but it seems to just be the same old stuff. (e.g when its on, it's on! he seems to be on the same wavelength as me)

''When I was done with the camera, I grabbed a pack of AA batteries to go with it, and met her back at the register. As she rang me up, the conversation went just like this:

Her: so did you get it open?
Me: yeah I figured it out, thanks. (pause) What's your name?
Her: Danielle.
Me: What time are you off, Danielle?
Her: 1.
(I flip my receipt over and write my name and number on it)
Me: My name is Dustin. I want you to call me as soon as you get out. Enjoy the rest of your shift.
Her: ok byee!

She called at 1, and met me at my place. We made out and fooled around for about 30 minutes before we finally got naked and ****ed wildly. She ended up leaving about 20 minutes ago, but was very enjoyable and energetic, so I got her number and will definitely hit her up again.

I do this particular pickup quite often, and it's very successful. Even the approach doesn't really change much (What's your name? When are you off? Here's my info. Call me). I can usually tell if she will end up ****ing me before I even say anything, because she'll usually get a little tense or nervous as I approach her. This is a good thing and a definite green light. Also, when I ask for her name, I switch from the "I'm just a normal customer" tone to the "hey you're lookin sexy" tone. You know you're doing it right if she has a shocked but excited look on her face You'll figure it out.

Have fun!

-Dbot ''

It is amazing that it is 2024 and we're still talking about negs.

Roosh wrote an article in January 2011 declaring that the neg was dead then (see below). Roosh did mention even in 2011 that most men doing approaches were misusing the neg.

There may have been a time when the neg was quite effective when used by a skilled seducer. That time was likely in the late 1990s/early 2000s. There have been too many shifts in game and culture since then.

While I have been aware of the neg since the 2000s, I have rarely ever used the neg over time.

American Girls Are Using Negs Now » Roosh V

I remember when I'd never get approached by women, even when I went out four nights a week. I accepted that I was not a good-looking guy whose looks alone could

web.archive.org

Problem is that PUA's think they can 'force' attraction in an unattracted girl without realising that it's a numbers game and when they pull a girl it's in spite of their negs and not because of them lol. (attracted and unattracted girls will react very differently from each other too a neg)

All of the best PUA's have hundreds and hundreds of interactions just like that (where's she's not into him and it's just him 'plowing' with his game for a while before the inevitable rejections)

It's essentially impossible to create attraction from nothing. Most of those interactions where there's no attraction are pointless conversations that are usually less than 60 seconds and don't result in an asking out on a date. The interaction is so bad it goes nowhere and doesn't even have an obvious rejection point. It's a soft rejection because no date offer was actually made.

I have had plenty of those conversations (both in daygame and nightgame) that lasted 30-60 seconds with no date offer made.

 

[characternote]

It's essentially impossible to create attraction from nothing. Most of those interactions where there's no attraction are pointless conversations that are usually less than 60 seconds and don't result in an asking out on a date. The interaction is so bad it goes nowhere and doesn't even have an obvious rejection point. It's a soft rejection because no date offer was actually made.

I have had plenty of those conversations (both in daygame and nightgame) that lasted 30-60 seconds with no date offer made.

Yep. It's why it's a numbers game. It's really not a game of 'skill'.

The only people who claim to have jedi mindtrick abilities where they can use various techniques to literally MAKE any girl they approach want him are just random people online who of course don't have infield footage or anything. It's just like people on bodybuilding forums claiming to be able to beat the world record deadlift lol.

In fact, some pro PUA's in the old days DID also claim this God like gift (mystery had this '5 for 5' concept where he said he could essentially sleep with 100% of girls due to his game) but when some of his infields started coming out, it was clear that it was pure fantasy! lol. In fact, his infields were really quite painful! They were generally him (when he was a younger, better looking, tall guy with a lot of social proof) boring girls who were below his SMV for a while and occasionally getting a number or a kiss. (don't even remember a lay infield!)
It couldn't have been less impressive! I have so many friends who have never heard about 'game' but who are just good looking, NORMAL dudes who would wipe the floor with mystery. It was almost 'anti game' to be quite honest. Sometimes almost talking himself out of a lay up (there was one infield like that where some much older woman, possibly a police officer from memory (?) clearly liked him from the get go and he basically slowly loses her attraction as he goes through his repertoire of DHV's and negs etc lol. Think it ended with a weak looking number close. I have the infield on a megalink somewhere on my pc)

What I realised is that there's literally nobody out there who can get better results than me. E.g, me, in their body, in their location would get almost identical results to them. (and them to me if they were in my body in my location etc!)
Be it any PUA coach or PUA forum member who thinks they're a ladies man lol.
We all bang the 'yes girls', and we all fail with the 'no girls'. And you have basically no control over what category she puts you in. Again, as we see in infields

 

[SW15]

I'm currently reading Day Bang!... this is the most retarded day game; pretending to be a doddering old fool to 'game' young women.
His "Is it Good?" openers are so incredibly lame. And asking wine advice from young women?

The opener about asking about something in a woman's grocery basket can be effective within grocery stores. It's really a throwaway line just to get a conversation started and transition into other topics. The idea is to get her talking, see if she's interested in discussing a 'big bait drop', working into GALNUC and resulting in an asking out on a date/phone number exchange.

I used that conversational framework in the early to mid 2010s before being able to more strongly improvise conversational topics on my approaches.

 

[SW15]

I do realise that if you have no game whatsoever, learning how to open conversations is important and you can develop your own style later,

That's how I perceived daygaming when I first started to learn how to daygame. I read Roosh's "Day Bang" very soon after it was published in September 2011. In 2011-2012, I had zero experience with what it is considered pure daygame. At that point in life, I had been in the mating environment for over 10 years. Almost all of my experience at that point in life was nightgame (off campus apartment parties in college and bars after I turned 21). I had never done a grocery store approach. I had never done a mall or bookstore approach. In high school and college, I had approached some girls in my classes and on campus, but it was the minority of my lifetime approaches at that point in my life.

I do think "Day Bang" helped me with some openers until I did enough openers to learn how to develop my own style in certain common daygame venues.

In 2024, there are better daygame training materials out there than 2011's "Day Bang". In 2011, there were fewer materials out there.

I would be likely to recommend Krauser's "Daygame Mastery" and some other YouTube channels to a novice daygamer.

the 'elderly opener' is cringe and non-sexual and will make you come across as weird and prematurely senile.

I can see your point on that. With an opener, the idea is to make an impression as a trustworthy and non-dangerous guy. The idea is to not let the woman think she's dealing with a psycho, hobo, or pushy salesman. The woman doesn't need to be super hot and super sexual for the man in the first minute, but she needs to be attracted enough and interested enough to engage in a conversation that's going to be long and meaningful enough to warrant future interaction (a date). From my in-person approaches, I prefer to only ask a woman out on a date when I think there's a good chance she'll say yes AND a good chance that the date will go well enough to warrant a second date.

Roosh is very adamant about not changing the openers (like the whole section about the Pet Shop opening), which is unwise as any verbally creative person can improve on that lame opener (and especially his explanation to the girl about wanting to buy a pet or something for someone else's pets).

I do not agree with this take.

The 'Pet Shop' opener became very outdated very fast. It might have been useful in the 2000s before the growth in smartphone ownership. In less tech advanced areas like Eastern Europe or Latin America, it's lifespan might have been extended by 2-3 years. By the early 2010s in the United States, enough women had smartphones and access to speedy enough internet on their phones to make the pet shop opener outdated and cringe.

Some of his theories are pretty good, but the 'execution' leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion.

That seems like a valid point to me.

 

[SW15]

It's why it's a numbers game. It's really not a game of 'skill'.

It's commonly said in sales, marketing, and seduction that it is a 'numbers game'. In all 3 areas, the idea of a 'numbers game' is a half truth and I think it is a dangerous half truth. I'll leave my sales and marketing analysis out of this response and focus on the seduction domain. Seduction has some commonality with the sales and marketing disciplines from business.

In seduction, there needs to be some numbers. It would be very difficult for a man to seduce without doing any approaches in-person, sending 0 DMs on social media platforms, and not swiping/sending in-app messages on the major swipe apps. To that extent, there needs to be some numbers through some activity.

At the same time, without a fundamental grasp of sedution, almost no amount of numbers can save a man. For instance, if a man is an obese, acne-ridden neckbeard of average or below height who lives in his parents' basement and has a McJob at best, there's almost no amount of numbers that can save that man. A man would be to have some fundamental offering that is appealing to some group of women. Another example is Eliot Rodger. One of Eliot Rodgers' grievances was the fact that he had a BMW 3 Series and wasn't getting females to flock to him. A BMW can be considered a solid car. Some people have claimed that BMW stands for 'Brings Me Women'. The biggest problem that Eliot Rodger offered nothing else that women would consider appealing besides a relatively new 3 Series. He wasn't tall and he was socially awkward. In addition, he only did a total of 1-2 lifetime approaches on girls, both of which lasted under 30 seconds. Eliot Rodger would have needed at least a Ferrari to overcome his shortcoming. He might have needed a Ferrari and a Patek Phillippe watch to impress girls. Even he had a Ferrari and Patek Phillippe, he still would have needed to at least initiate a verbal conversation by saying "Hello, I am Eliot. I have a Ferrari and Patek Phillippe. I am awesome. Are you single? What is your name?"

I have so many friends who have never heard about 'game' but who are just good looking, NORMAL dudes who would wipe the floor with mystery.

The best seducers I have known never read Mystery or other well known seduction gurus.

One of the best seducers I have known (triple digit notch count) had mediocre verbal game at best. He got his notches based on his 6'4" height, light brown hair, and blue eyes. It was the kind of cookie cutter White male look that played well with bougie White women in Dallas. Additionally, he had status as a former NCAA athlete. Because his look played well with bougie White women in Dallas, he went to bars that bougie White women in Dallas tended to go to and he would approach them in the 1-2 hours before closing time. In many cases, the women were somewhat intoxicated when they first met him.

Another really good seducer I know has a totally different style of initiating interactions than the man above. He tends to have a sixth sense for the most batshiit crazy women in the city and finds his way to them. He typically finds batshiit crazy women on swipe apps, sets up dates, and then uses his personality to complete the initial seduction. I don't think his personality is anything special but apparently his target market does,

I think both of these men understood their target markets and found ways to be successful with them.

 

[SW15]

One important part about how women perceive me is that I'm both trustworthy and 'dangerous'. While I leave women in a better state than I found them, I still challenge the status quo and I mainly attract women who need a bit more adventure in their conformist lives.

You have a valid point with trustworthy and 'dangerous'. I used 'non-dangerous' in the sense of become a victim of a crime on the street in that moment of a daygame approach.

The danger concept is an interesting one. There are edgy, 'bad boy' types who are able to seduce partial on the basis of the danger element. Nightlife venue bouncers, motorcyclists, tattoo artists, drug traffickers, and certain athletes (boxers, American football players, hockey players) are examples of guys who can be dangerous in certain ways who can appeal to women.

@AmsterdamAssassin has a certain vibe that he knows how to use. I don't have the same vibe from my appearance and I would be incongruent if I tried to mimic the vibe of @AmsterdamAssassin . Fortunately, there are numerous approaches that can be successful with women.