Why smart betas do better than alphas

[BettorOffSingle]

Several reasons:

1. Higher standards The "alpha" tends to be indiscriminate, blowing away whatever is in his path, while the "beta" tends to be very picky. Another subtlety is that the alpha gravitates towards women who already want him (dismissing the ones who don't with NC), while the "beta" tends to choose the woman he likes, and THEN pursues her. The "results-oriented" approach is easy, because it's a numbers game, while the "target-oriented" approach is difficult, because the menu is reduced to the oneitis. Even a future PUA who is "AFC" will learn better from the target approach. If you factor out this difficulty, the "beta" does almost as well as the "alpha," with the "PUA" simply expanding his menu and lowering his standards, while not really improving.

2. No drama. The AFC "beta" complains about women who cause drama, play games, etc. and refuses to give him a fair deal, which lowers his options (similar to high standards), while the "alpha PUA" will learn to exploit the games, but this leaves him with defective women who will often cause very negative long-term outcomes.

3. Clear conscience The "beta" doesn't lie, cheat, or otherwise manipulate women to get them into bed, unless he's a DUMB beta who schemes on a single LJBF. A smart beta lets even his LJBF know if he wants more, but is also cool with the friendship, though he'll let his LJBF know that he is "reluctantly" pursuing other chicks, and "settling" for no-strings sex, since SHE is the one he wants for a girlfriend. This checkmates the target, because if she accepts this frame, she is effetively telling him "go ahead, use hotter women than me for sex." No woman is going to endorse or allow that, especially if she can rig the outcome by focking him.

4. No time-wasting. While pursing my "oneitis," "Kate," at college, I picked up a 4.0 GPA, because I did not waste time pursuing other targets, though a half-dozen or so of them pursued me, one even moving a next door to where I was in the spring semester (that was HBHalloween, who I laid), while I had moved near Kate, not to "game" her, but as a reminder that even proximity wouldn't get her. I also didn't have to go out of my way to run into her, which saved even more time, as I could just chill studying in the lounge or whatever and get work done. Huge advantage to the beta, because he's bettering himself rather than "crashing and burning" for inferior targets.

5. Less turnover A "PUA" has to be able to pull, because the bar trash he gets has a short shelf life. He will also mistakenly believe that "all women want alphas," because the jerk-groupies are always on the market (they can't keep an LTR), while the quality women (the ones who value betas) just quietly hook up with one, often remaining with him for years. A "beta"who gets laid once might get 300 more lays, while the alpha might get six.

6. Less risk . No drama, no AMOGs, no fights, no behavior that can be spun against you down the road (buyer's remorse), etc. Risk of violence at the hands of rivals is minimized, etc. Also less STD risk.

Being "beta" requires patience, discipline, the ability to recognize quality women, and a refusal to settle. This is beyond the grasp of the typical "PUA," who tends to want instant gratification, and to conquer even inferior targets, not realizing that it is usually better to be alone while waiting for a quality woman, than to be hooked into a piece of bar trash.

 

[Borknagar]

Hmmm good point in a lot of ways. I'm a bit of both in some ways, but the good women that are single the betas are looking for usually don't exist, and are taken up by the others pretty quickly. +1 still though

 

[Strelok]

While I have no problem to recognize that its because of betas that the modern world is technologically advanced and safe, we have to keep in mind that the modern environment do not favor them in any way.

Wheter is getting the hot girl in her prime or get the promotion and be the boss at work require a certain amount of aggressivity, lack of moral and will to do whatever it takes despite the risks.

Beta most of the time have brain and ability to wait and negotiate but mostly lack the balls to do what it takes to satisfy their own interested and worse yet they avoid conflict.

There is no change in the status quo if there is no conflict, you can't become the boss if you dont kick out the old one.

 

[zekko]

Honestly, BetterOffSingle, when you first came here talking about your book, 29 Reasons Not to Be a Nice Guy, I thought this just sounded like more of the same stuff we hear on here ad nauseum. But you actually have some fresh and interesting ideas.

Most of the time when guys talk about Betas on here, they're actually describing Omega males. But as you point out, if you're an upper level Beta, it's not as bad an existence as they make it out to be.

If you only read this forum, you'll get the impression that the only males getting any action are the Alphas. The truth is, there are an awful lot of guys getting laid out there, and you're helping to explain why.

 

[satelliteparties]

It does make life a lot easier not wanting to rack up numbers and wanting quality over quantity.

I have 3 categories:

1.)No attraction. Would not sleep with under any conditions.

2.)Might date/sleep with if they had high interest in me and things were easy or if we just met and it didn't involve me chasing her. For example, I went on a date with a woman on pof, she left after 10 minutes (it said on her profile, which I didn't read that part before we met, she prefers a first meeting to be a quick meet up instead of a date just in case there's no chemistry)...and I didn't even care...didn't bother calling her out or looking concerned, didn't get in touch with her on phone or computer, and was completely over the situation right after it happened other than the shock factor (first bad date I ever had.)

If she had been interested, and was an interesting person, I may have dated her/done her...but I wouldn't have given a sh*t either way if I didn't get to nail her or things didn't last long.

3.)"My type" and someone I could see myself not only realistically dating, but looking at a year down the road (assuming our personalities were compatible) and not being sick of her.

Or someone that probably isn't good for me or would go for me, but would love to have sex with.

I'd say 60 percent of women fit the "1" category, 30 percent fit the "2" category, and 10 percent fit the "3" category.

That's the thing...I firmly believe that there are lots of "3s" out there. Especially if you haven't really known her/dated her a long time/been sexually intimate with her...there's no reason to get attached.

And when I'm in a nursing home, if I can say I dated/slept with a few 3s in my lifetime, I will be happy.

I have no concern about "pick-up" or bar game or racking up one night stands.

 

[BettorOffSingle]

While I have no problem to recognize that its because of betas that the modern world is technologically advanced and safe, we have to keep in mind that the modern environment do not favor them in any way.

Sure it does. See the LACK OF RISK I note. You forget the key question against “alpha” lifestyle: WHO DIED ALONG THE WAY? It’s like saying drug dealing is a great lifestyle by pointing to active drug dealers, not the ones in prison or dead. Betas do not take alpha risks. Most do not have to.

Wheter is getting the hot girl in her prime or get the promotion and be the boss at work require a certain amount of aggressivity, lack of moral and will to do whatever it takes despite the risks. Beta most of the time have brain and ability to wait and negotiate but mostly lack the balls to do what it takes to satisfy their own interested and worse yet they avoid conflict. There is no change in the status quo if there is no conflict, you can't become the boss if you dont kick out the old one.

I said SMART beta, not ALL betas. A SMART beta works around the alpha and isn’t trying to one-up him, so he’s content to let the alpha think he is winning, even if the alpha just got rejected by his girlfriend, the one he didn’t even know the beta had. The Google kids didn’t displace anyone, nor did they take risks. Cheating is not the only way to get ahead. When I win money at the track, I don’t have to argue with anyone, I just have to pick winners. Domaineers just have to buy the right domains. etc.

Honestly, BetterOffSingle, when you first came here talking about your book, 29 Reasons Not to Be a Nice Guy, I thought this just sounded like more of the same stuff we hear on here ad nauseum. But you actually have some fresh and interesting ideas.

29 Reasons was written in April 1999. Who is copying who here? Those ideas, like the PIVOT, reverse-timetable, and the “psychic gimmicks” (chick crack) were all “fresh” ideas at one point as well. The “community” began stalling on new theory around 2001, when I stopped releasing it due to others stealing it. When I say I BUILT this community, I am not joking. Mystery and a few others did too; it was a half-dozen of us on ASF just showing the world, and women, that we weren’t these idiots. Women had been acting on boards like all men were stupid, and we just started shutting them up. We all got banned from Prodigy, AOL, and all the boards run by whipped geeks. ASF was a free-speech environment. No woman ever defeated our logic there, and most stopped trying.

With Bettor Off Single, I reviewed my own love life. The original title was “understanding and seducing the social-climbing slot.” Then I realized Kate was not a social-climbing golddigger, and that my entire “PUA” view was flawed. I went back to the beginning of my love life, and went forward, woman by woman, and was shocked at how well I did as an “AFC.” Then I realized that this is what laid the foundation for my success as a “reluctant PUA.” Reluctant PUA game is unstoppable, because you begin as a nice guy who “gives women a chance.” I did this with Kate. If Kate marries me, I stay a loyal AFC. If she doesn’t, and she didn’t, I become a “reluctant PUA” who, instead of “settling” for a “DupliKate,” chose instead to just go for sex and looks. RELUCTANTLY, of course. I was not PLAYING hard to get; I was IMPOSSIBLE to get, for real. It also helped that no woman came close to measuring up to Kate, save for a few other “Aces.”

Most of the time when guys talk about Betas on here, they're actually describing Omega males. But as you point out, if you're an upper level Beta, it's not as bad an existence as they make it out to be.

I call them GAMMA males. What’s a gamma? The guy who invents a new problem once you solve his old one. The guy who finds a new reason to give you crap once you take away his last excuse. The guy who figures you’re a loser simply because you’re talking to HIM. The guy who wants the hottie everyone else wants, for nothing more than showing up. The guy who says he doesn’t buy e-books because he likes a “real book,” even if that adds $10.00 a copy to the cost of producing one. Waaaah!! Gammas are stupid, emotional vampires. A solid beta will crush an Alpha for any decent chick because he’s genuine, nice, HONEST, and built to last. His “game” is not based on trickery. He’s like a chess opening that doesn’t rely on the opponent’s ignorance, where knowing what he does will not help you stop him, the way it will with a PUA, who plays “trick openings” that have one, but only one, refutation.

If you only read this forum, you'll get the impression that the only males getting any action are the Alphas. The truth is, there are an awful lot of guys getting laid out there, and you're helping to explain why.

Actually, most alphas whine about the SHB9.9 with the “AFC borefriend,” which is an admission that the AFC is getting regular sex from her, without having to go out and hunt every night (frees him up to do things like cure cancer instead). Also note that the “gurus” get more testimonials if guys play the numbers game, and they get kickbacks from the nightclubs and bars they tilt their students at.

It does make life a lot easier not wanting to rack up numbers and wanting quality over quantity.

This factor alone equalizes the “AFC” and “PUA” results.

I have 3 categories: (snip)

I have one: SUPER-ELITE. “Pharmaceutical-grade women.” Do a search for “the pharmacology of women,” where I took the wiki article for COCAINE and did a global replace of “women” for “cocaine.” Very funny read. I am a “recreational user of pharmaceutical-grade women.” I averaged maybe 6-10 lays a YEAR during my prime, but turned down 200+ along the way. The type of women I got, and the experiences I had, were worth more than 100-200 lays that most PUAs get. If you count “erotic hypnosis” as a sexual encounter, however, my lay count rose to 200-300 a year, or more, in my prime. One odd thing about PUAs is that they get over actually having to have sex every time, and are quicker to rely on things like porn, masturbation, or even prostitutes. This is because they have absolutely nothing to prove to anyone, especially not themselves. I used to say I’d rather jerk off to a 10 than fock a 7, and I still believe that.

My “perfect wife/girlfriend” type is what I call the ACE OF CLUBS. Learn to identify that type and you’ll be shocked at how superior the beta is to the alpha. Every AOC I’ve ever seduced, and there were five, never went for PUAs, never treated me like crap, and never made me act like a jerk to get them. They were hot, loyal, and played fair. I had chances with five of them that could have led to marriage, but I was too arrogant and refused to “settle.” At my age, I wouldn’t offend an AOC by offering a fraction of my former self to them, but they are the greatest women on the planet. They’re also invisible to most “alphas” because they aren’t flashy unless they have observed you carefully, and want your attention. They are the attractive, nice, “boring” women who catch fire once you get them alone.

Speaking of erotic hypnosis, get a video called "Yes" from KismetVideo, and see if you still think physical sex is the holy grail. That video DOES more to me than most live women ever could. Even Ashlee, the hypnotist, is now married with a child, so she is not even the woman in the video anymore. That woman no longer exists! I like to say that "Ashlee doesn't put men under; she puts them AWAY." Ashlee is also an Ace of Clubs, which is why she was so "hypnotically generous" as compared to most female hypnotists, who basically just hypnotize men enough to tease them into desperation, whereas Ashlee gives a "complete, genuine, hypnotic experience."

Obviously I'd rather have live women like that, but at 44, they don't want me as much as they used to, and few women have the skills to begin with. Ashlee dated a string of very nice guys, "strong betas," until she married one. These guys are always nice, always polite, and conflict-averse, because they know that chest-pounding in public is not worth losing someone like Ashlee in private.

We are definitely heading towards sexbots who are going to give women a serious run for their money, and crash a lot of the porn/cam/stripper market that lives on exploiting sex-addicted betas. A simple $24.95 video cured my stripclub habit, and Ihaven't bought an ounce of porn since, save for other hypno videos.

Ashlee's video is not porn, btw. It is a sexy woman doing powerful hypnosis, which those with the fetish find ideal. Most men may not like being rendered immobile, thoughtless, 1000 percent obedient, made to hallucinate, travel back in time in their mind, and the like, but I definitely do. It's an acquired taste. Even when I find a live hypnotist, her technique never measures up to Ashlee's, and her video is available anytime I want it, at no extra cost. This, in turn, makes me less desperate in the field, particularly with strippers, who I have begun seducing again lately.

Older men have to run MUCH different game.

Forgot to add: both Le Club and "Mom of Clubs" (her mom) were very sexy hypnotists. Her mom once hypnotized me over the phone, and had previuosly invited me to come see her in my neighborhood. I brought my mom instead of seeing the obvious. What a missed opportunity.

Then there was SHBWitchy, probably the sexiest "nice girl" or any woman I have ever known, also hypnotized me over the phone into oblivion, but I chose not to fly to oregon, even though she hinted at wanting to marry me. She was 20, I was 28.

 

[MainDroite]

Reading you, BettorOffSingle, is like taking a breath of fresh air while watching the sun wipe away the morning dew.

So it is actually possible to get chicks without having to be a master manipulator?

 

[Johnny_Kage]

I think it depends how you define "alpha" and "beta."

It seems like your definition of a beta male is my definition of an alpha male.

In my opinion, alphas:
1) Have good values
2) Are leaders, but also know when to follow
3) Are confident, but not necessarily ****y
4) Are honest and straight forward with people
5) Are dominant, but not TOO dominant....and don't need to flaunt it
6) Are likable and able to develop connections with people
7) Have the ability to handle any situation with grace and class

I DON'T define alpha as a guy that hits on everything or the loudest person in the group. In my experience, those guys are always trying to compensate for something and, thus, they are inherently NOT alpha. Their true colors come out eventually.

Also, my goals for being a "PUA" (I actually hate that term and prefer "guy that's good with girls") are to get beautiful quality girls and be able to handle them. When the time comes when I'm ready to settle down, I want to have the ability to point out a girl, be like "I want her," then get her, regardless of how long it takes. In my opinion, anyone that is able to do this is alpha.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I think it depends how you define "alpha" and "beta."

My thoughts exactly. I'm not much for the terms "alpha" and "beta", but I define an alpha as a guy, usually a natural, who attracts and gets (hot) women whether that be for ONS, MLTR, LTR or whatever he wants. I define a beta as a guy who does not attract and does not get women or gets very few less attractive women and rarely. So a beta is the frustrated, nice guy or AFC. If he gets any woman at all she tends to be unattractive and domineering and is using him as provider and for his money.

I think rather than using the terms alpha or beta, maybe terms like natural vs scripted game or direct vs indirect or something else would be better.

 

[cstrife32]

Nice post ,BetterOffSingle. I just have one question with all of it, though. Do you think cold approaching is still necessary as a smart beta, or do you let your social circle, daily happenings, etc. supply these "pharmaceutical-grade women"? I'm about 150 pages into your book , and it's a very interesting read with some very interesting theory, but I have trouble applying your theory and relating it to my every day life.

 

[satelliteparties]

I'm not a "cool" guy...some women are thoroughly unattracted to me. But I live my life on my own terms, have lots of hobbies, work out for myself, am a nice and courteous person without being a pushover. A lot of people on the site would call me "beta" because even with a semi-athletic body I look "nerdy."

But really...like Bettoroff is saying...who's the real loser? The guy who feels threatened by any man looking his girlfriend's way, wears his hat tilted and tilts back when he drives, or the guy that isn't "cool" by society's definition but is confident in himself and doesn't base his confidence on which women do and don't like him?

I don't care that I'm "beta" in the eyes of wannabe punk men and certain women that look at me and say "I'd never do him because I don't find him attractive"...I care about the people that look past that bs and want a real man with strengths and flaws.

What made Jack Bauer so great for a TV character was that as bada$$ as he was, he was also human and showed emotion.

What BettorOff is saying is that a guy like myself is "winning" because he doesn't care how the wannabe alphas are living their life, what AWs they're trying to bang, because he's busy doing something with his life and when he meets women, he meets and attracts quality women on the inside and out...women that aren't caught up in the "alpha" bs.

 

[bukowski_merit]

I don't even classify myself with all these terms (but can still recognize that it’s dumb to name something "smart beta", although if you're marketing something as zekko's response seems to indicate - than I can understand every stance you’re making as a marketing ploy).

Several reasons:

1. Higher standards The "alpha" tends to be indiscriminate, blowing away whatever is in his path, while the "beta" tends to be very picky. Another subtlety is that the alpha gravitates towards women who already want him (dismissing the ones who don't with NC), while the "beta" tends to choose the woman he likes, and THEN pursues her. The "results-oriented" approach is easy, because it's a numbers game, while the "target-oriented" approach is difficult, because the menu is reduced to the oneitis. Even a future PUA who is "AFC" will learn better from the target approach. If you factor out this difficulty, the "beta" does almost as well as the "alpha," with the "PUA" simply expanding his menu and lowering his standards, while not really improving.

How could you possibly know what another man is "settling" for. How could you know that he is lowering his standards? You have no proof of any of this stuff other than what you "imagine" is going on. And you might not even really be imagining it - you might just be creating it to better hold up your own theories.

2. No drama. The AFC "beta" complains about women who cause drama, play games, etc. and refuses to give him a fair deal, which lowers his options (similar to high standards), while the "alpha PUA" will learn to exploit the games, but this leaves him with defective women who will often cause very negative long-term outcomes.

All women will eventually seem defective at points in any long-term relationship. A weak man who doesn't know what he's doing will sacrifice his balls for peace in those situations. Giving up your balls for less drama = effectively only makes things worse (and leads to posts like: “How come my woman won’t have sex with me anymore?“ which a lot of the arm chair boyfriends around here will turn into “she’s a cheating wh@re” instead of – “because you already gave her your balls.”) Weak men do not leave defective women, they sit home and cry about them. If they say, "ok this woman is giving too much drama to my life, i am going to leave her" - than that is a clear sign of strength and a healthy self-esteem.

Time and time again on here - these weak men are in relationships with women, and those relationships are dead horses. These weak men refuse to give up on that horse. They keep trying to ride it.

A man who can puppet string a woman's behavior or a man who will leave at the sign of drama beyond what he can handle = a strong man.

3. Clear conscience The "beta" doesn't lie, cheat, or otherwise manipulate women to get them into bed, unless he's a DUMB beta who schemes on a single LJBF. A smart beta lets even his LJBF know if he wants more, but is also cool with the friendship, though he'll let his LJBF know that he is "reluctantly" pursuing other chicks, and "settling" for no-strings sex, since SHE is the one he wants for a girlfriend. This checkmates the target, because if she accepts this frame, she is effetively telling him "go ahead, use hotter women than me for sex." No woman is going to endorse or allow that, especially if she can rig the outcome by focking him.

While this can happen; what you’re doing here - is purely mental masturbation. This is also dangerous advice for someone who may have hang-ups about “that one woman” to listen to.

There’s no doubt that giving a low interest woman your attention and then taking it away and giving it to other women is an effective way to raise her interest, but to say she won’t allow it? LOL, yeah, if she bases her whole sense of pride on keeping as many men interested in her as possible. But a woman who fvcks a man just to keep him in her life is hardly high quality. Argue with that and you are a fool.

Also, you have a clear contradiction going on in this post.

1) You claim to not try to manipulate women or lie.
2) While at the same time – the whole second part of your paragraph is explaining to men how giving the impression that you’ll “reluctantly settle” for no strings attached other women will make the woman want to fvck you to prevent that from happen.
3) You go on to explain later (in your last paragraph) that you should be alone rather than fvck inferior trash. Which means you’re lying to the woman when you give the impression that you’re going to be with lesser women if she doesn’t give into a relationship with you.

Smells like lying and manipulation to me.

4. No time-wasting. While pursing my "oneitis," "Kate," at college, I picked up a 4.0 GPA, because I did not waste time pursuing other targets, though a half-dozen or so of them pursued me, one even moving a next door to where I was in the spring semester (that was HBHalloween, who I laid), while I had moved near Kate, not to "game" her, but as a reminder that even proximity wouldn't get her. I also didn't have to go out of my way to run into her, which saved even more time, as I could just chill studying in the lounge or whatever and get work done. Huge advantage to the beta, because he's bettering himself rather than "crashing and burning" for inferior targets.

WTF? Is anyone here willing to back this? You sound crazy here man. I mean, the part about how not pursuing women gives you more time to focus on other stuff is very true, and I’ll back that. But the rest of the stuff you wrote, is backwards justification of some pretty abnormal (if not psychotic) behavior.

5. Less turnover A "PUA" has to be able to pull, because the bar trash he gets has a short shelf life. He will also mistakenly believe that "all women want alphas," because the jerk-groupies are always on the market (they can't keep an LTR), while the quality women (the ones who value betas) just quietly hook up with one, often remaining with him for years. A "beta"who gets laid once might get 300 more lays, while the alpha might get six.

A “PUA” is a fool if he’s only pulling “bar trash”. And every girl at a bar is not trash just for being there. I’m not even a big proprietor of bar/club pickup, but you seem to have a disdain for that scene (as well as the “alpha” men) which skews your view of everything.

“300”, “6”, blah blah blah… again, you’re pulling BS numbers out of your @ss to try to back your theory.

“might get 6”… “might get 60”…. Or “might get 600”…

I’ve read plenty of pickup literature (even though I focus more on relationships myself) and I can’t ever recall a PUA advising men to just have One-night stands. In fact, if you do only focus on having one nighters - you WILL become more desperate, and you will be more lonely than the weak man who has given his balls up for momentarily gratification from a wife/girlfriend.

6. Less risk . No drama, no AMOGs, no fights, no behavior that can be spun against you down the road (buyer's remorse), etc. Risk of violence at the hands of rivals is minimized, etc. Also less STD risk.

Fear of all these things (except the STD risk) is weak! You want to live a sheltered life afraid of a little traffic? Fine, you sit on the street corner and stay there! Or better yet – stay in your house period. This worlds too cold for you.

You're giving a lot of guys who are coming from bad experiences with women hope that if they continue doing what they're doing but do it in a "smart" way that everything will work out. That's what i find most disturbing about all of this.

Being "beta" requires patience, discipline, the ability to recognize quality women, and a refusal to settle. This is beyond the grasp of the typical "PUA," who tends to want instant gratification, and to conquer even inferior targets, not realizing that it is usually better to be alone while waiting for a quality woman, than to be hooked into a piece of bar trash.

The problem with your: “be alone until you find that one special girl” theory is that there’s no way you’ve possibly field tested that enough to be teaching it.

If your little, “I don’t want to be friends with you, but I’ll accept it, and go be with women that aren’t you while still wanting to be with you,” thing worked on 1-2 women – that’s cool… great! Way to manipulate them playa…. But over a broad spectrum of women and different men operating in different ways – how confident are you that something like that would work?

I mean, maybe you’re a big believer in fate, soul mates, and letting things happen. If so, ok…. But many men will only damage themselves trying that approach. That takes borderline sociopath emotional detachment ability to pull off.

You can look at it like: “Yeah, she doesn’t want me right now. But she’ll come around eventually.”

And you can grow old with that sh!t.

 

[BettorOffSingle]

I don't even classify myself with all these terms (but can still recognize that it’s dumb to name something "smart beta", although if you're marketing something as zekko's response seems to indicate - than I can understand every stance you’re making as a marketing ploy).

Actually paid advertising (including TV comnmercials) are going to be my “marketing ploy.” I’m here to HELP PEOPLE, FREE, like people supposedly want, but you seem to have a problem with that. You also bombed me with a megaresponse that I’ll have to snip or split up to respond to. Most “gurus” don’t even defend their work directly, relying on “social proof” (bought) to convince the masses they know what they’re doing.

How could you possibly know what another man is "settling" for. How could you know that he is lowering his standards? You have no proof of any of this stuff other than what you "imagine" is going on. And you might not even really be imagining it - you might just be creating it to better hold up your own theories.

PUA’s definitely SETTLE. You’re not going to find a super-elite every Friday night in a bar. You’re not going to find her by cold-approaching and declarintg one whoever happens to say yes. PUAs play a NUMBERS GAME. AFC/Betas do the OPPOSITE. The PUA “falls” for whoever says yes; the AFC falls first, then pursues. The PUA chooses one out of 200 random approaches, and the easy one (who said yes), the AFC selects ONE, and pursues HER. Which do you think is more difficult, and therefore, better practice? I’m not imagining ANYTHING: I’m 44 years old, was AFC from 13-18, PUA the rest of the way. Factoring out the different styles, my results were as good or better as an AFC.

All women will eventually seem defective at points in any long-term relationship. A weak man who doesn't know what he's doing will sacrifice his balls for peace in those situations.

The “four aces” of which I spoke all held up incredibly well for a quarter-century. One married a millionaire, another became a millionaire, yet another pursued her artistic dreams, and the fourth found a nice boyfriend and a good career helping people. All gems. It was when I reviewed how they turned out versus my “PUA” targets that I noticed the striking contrast.

Giving up your balls for less drama = effectively only makes things worse (and leads to posts like: “How come my woman won’t have sex with me anymore?“ which a lot of the arm chair boyfriends around here will turn into “she’s a cheating wh@re” instead of – “because you already gave her your balls.”) Weak men do not leave defective women, they sit home and cry about them. If they say, "ok this woman is giving too much drama to my life, i am going to leave her" - than that is a clear sign of strength and a healthy self-esteem.

Betas don’t engage in your type of insulting chest-pounding. No need for conflict or aggression. STRONG betas (notice I said STRONG betas) don’t choose defective women, or they bail out if things go sour.

Time and time again on here - these weak men are in relationships with women, and those relationships are dead horses. These weak men refuse to give up on that horse. They keep trying to ride it.

Ever think the happy men perhaps don’t bother posting to fora like this? Sampling bias.

A man who can puppet string a woman's behavior or a man who will leave at the sign of drama beyond what he can handle = a strong man.

No that’s a little boy. A strong man chooses better women in the first place. Maybe YOU never had a true super-elite, but don’t project that onto BETAS who have. Ever notice that the PERFECT women always have these nice-guy boyfriends who rarely argue or fight? They don’t have to. They’re winning. The PUA is the try-hard who needs DRAMA.

While this can happen; what you’re doing here - is purely mental masturbation. This is also dangerous advice for someone who may have hang-ups about “that one woman” to listen to.

So he should listen to your chest-thumping and learn to “pull her strings?” Only trashy sluts allow that; super-elites do not. You insult me as if you had anything to back it up. You also act like you should be the only one they listen to. That’s amusing. I must really be getting to you. No surprise there; little boys cannot handle the logic of a TRUE real man.

There’s no doubt that giving a low interest woman your attention and then taking it away and giving it to other women is an effective way to raise her interest, but to say she won’t allow it? LOL, yeah, if she bases her whole sense of pride on keeping as many men interested in her as possible. But a woman who fvcks a man just to keep him in her life is hardly high quality. Argue with that and you are a fool.

I don’t agree with that.

Also, you have a clear contradiction going on in this post.

1) You claim to not try to manipulate women or lie.
2) While at the same time – the whole second part of your paragraph is explaining to men how giving the impression that you’ll “reluctantly settle” for no strings attached other women will make the woman want to fvck you to prevent that from happen.
3) You go on to explain later (in your last paragraph) that you should be alone rather than fvck inferior trash. Which means you’re lying to the woman when you give the impression that you’re going to be with lesser women if she doesn’t give into a relationship with you.

Who said lesser women? I chose GREAT women as a PUA, I just didn’t have relationships with them. Try READING someone’s writing before you try to slam it.

Smells like lying and manipulation to me.

Not if it’s genuine. After Kate, I didn’t want to marry or even have a girlfriend. Just sex.

WTF? Is anyone here willing to back this? You sound crazy here man.

Actually you’re the one writing THOUSANDS of characters in response to a simple post, insulting me in a way you would NEVER do to my face (you’d crap your pants first little one), and you’re showing a level of ANGER that would totally scare away a super-elite. Guys like you are so easy to tool to women. Oh and real men have real names; I post mine. What’s yours?

You totally miss the point that a Beta who wants a woman he cannot have should NOT get oneitis, but instead make the best of his freedom. Reluctant PUA game is what I’ve tested my ENTIRE adult life, because it’s the actual game I ran. Ideally, a man’s “Kate” marries him and he wins the game outright.

For all your alleged prowess, you aren’t giving much specific advice on how to score these women you say you can pull. I lay out my ENTIRE playbook, FREE. When you can match that, get back to me.

They used to call me crazy for endorsing the pivot too. You seem to ignore the fact that I’m out of the game, and wrote the book as a memoir and blueprint for the next generation of men. Guys my age just use money and status and brains and luck and that’s it. It’s all we have. I’m well past my prime and spend most of my time betting horses online. Why do you think I have all day to post?

I snipped the rest of your post as it was incredibly long. You just sound like another silly, wannabe-alpha BOY who has never had a 9.5 or up. Those were the ONLY women I focked (almost anyway) for a decade, before age began slowing me down. When I "settled." it was for the type of WOMAN that the typical "PUA" would call "relationship material." To me they were just empty-netters.

I never lied to women becuase I never pretended to want a relationship when I didn't.

 

[st_99]

I think all this alpha beta sht is retarted. Its such a vague concept, its all grey area.

 

[MurdocIsGod]

BettorOffSingle's "love" website:
http://www.ilovelexiainsworth.com/

YouTube account:
http://www.youtube.com/BettorOffSingle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqvbHybNhgs&feature=channel_video_title
Bekowski, you would definitely not dare say anything to this macho man's face. Now stop trying to out-alpha the alpha!

 

[Solomon]

I think all this alpha beta sht is retarted. Its such a vague concept, its all grey area.

Thank you!!

Only in the "community" do guy's think That picking up women is "black&white" if you don't do "A,B,C,D" or "1,2,3" you ain't getting laid, that's a crock of shyt and anyone who lives in the "real world" knows this

 

[49au]

I think all this alpha beta sht is retarted. Its such a vague concept, its all grey area.

Exactly. All these terms - "AFC", "alpha", "beta", "omega", "smart beta", "PUA" - are so loosely defined (in this thread and in general) that this debate is actually kind of pointless.

What one poster views as "alpha", another views as "smart beta," and so on.

 

[zekko]

Only in the "community" do guy's think That picking up women is "black&white" if you don't do "A,B,C,D" or "1,2,3" you ain't getting laid, that's a crock of shyt and anyone who lives in the "real world" knows this

Yep.

Exactly. All these terms
- "AFC", "alpha", "beta", "omega", "smart beta", "PUA" - are so loosely defined (in this thread and in general) that this debate is actually kind of pointless.

What one poster views as "alpha", another views as "smart beta," and so on.

Yeah, I think Warrior74 noted that alpha is a position, not a person.
An alpha is the top male in the room, or group, or whatever. It can be a different guy in different situations. The alpha male at work may be the boss, for instance. The alpha male at the track may be the guy with the fastest car.

A lot of guys here think that as long as you're a confident guy, that makes you an alpha. It's kind of a low standard for being alpha, and it isn't necessarily so.

 

[Solomon]

Yep.


Yeah, I think Warrior74 noted that alpha is a position, not a person.
An alpha is the top male in the room, or group, or whatever. It can be a different guy in different situations. The alpha male at work may be the boss, for instance. The alpha male at the track may be the guy with the fastest car.

A lot of guys here think that as long as you're a confident guy, that makes you an alpha. It's kind of a low standard for being alpha, and it isn't necessarily so.

Why is the community so obsessed with the whole ALPHA concept?

its really errie

 

[loveshogun]

The OP's description of "Alpha Males" is more in line with Neil Strauss' criticism of the social robots that began to appear.

Guys who pretend to be awesome, versus actually being awesome. I think we've all met them at some point.

Anyway, the difference can be summed up thusly...


First time I see a woman, I ask myself the question:

"Would I f*ck her?"

For anyone above a 5, the answer is usually yes. But that doesn't mean that I do, or even that I TRY.

I'm not at such a shortage of p*ssy that I need to jump through hoops for scraps.

A lot of the guys who are newer at this focus so much on the techniques that they forget that seduction was supposed to ADD something to their life. It was never meant to BE their life.

And, unfortunately, if you're an AFC, and you AREN'T getting a steady supply of release, then you're more likely to be the type who gets gung ho about this and turns all the resources in his life toward getting laid.